From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Okash Khawaja <okash.khawaja@gmail.com>
Cc: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.com>,
Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>,
Alan Cox <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
Kirk Reiser <kirk@reisers.ca>,
Chris Brannon <chris@the-brannons.com>,
speakup@linux-speakup.org
Subject: Re: tty contention resulting from tty_open_by_device export
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2017 10:38:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170708083803.GA23080@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170707202841.GA4177@sanghar>
On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 09:28:41PM +0100, Okash Khawaja wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The commit 12e84c71b7d4ee (tty: export tty_open_by_driver) exports
> tty_open_by_device to allow tty to be opened from inside kernel which
> works fine except that it doesn't handle contention with user space or
> another kernel-space open of the same tty. For example, opening a tty
> from user space while it is kernel opened results in failure and a
> kernel log message about mismatch between tty->count and tty's file open
> count.
>
> I suggest we make kernel access to tty exclusive so that if a user
> process or kernel opens a kernel opened tty, it gets -EBUSY. Below is
> a patch which does this by adding TTY_KOPENED flag to tty->flags. When
> this flag is set, tty_open_by_driver returns -EBUSY. Instead of
> overlaoding tty_open_by_driver for both kernel and user space, this
> patch creates a separate function tty_kopen which closely follows
> tty_open_by_driver.
>
> I am far from an expert on tty and this patch might contain the wrong
> approach. But it should convey what I mean.
>
> Thanks,
> Okash
>
> ---
> drivers/staging/speakup/spk_ttyio.c | 2 -
> drivers/tty/tty_io.c | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> include/linux/tty.h | 7 +---
> 3 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/drivers/staging/speakup/spk_ttyio.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/speakup/spk_ttyio.c
> @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ static int spk_ttyio_initialise_ldisc(st
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - tty = tty_open_by_driver(dev, NULL, NULL);
> + tty = tty_kopen(dev);
> if (IS_ERR(tty))
> return PTR_ERR(tty);
>
> --- a/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/tty_io.c
> @@ -1786,6 +1786,53 @@ static struct tty_driver *tty_lookup_dri
> }
>
> /**
> + * tty_kopen - open a tty device for kernel
> + * @device: dev_t of device to open
If nothing else, this api call is much simpler overall, as your use
above shows :)
> + *
> + * Opens tty exclusively for kernel. Performs the driver lookup,
> + * makes sure it's not already opened and performs the first-time
> + * tty initialization.
> + *
> + * Returns the locked initialized &tty_struct
> + *
> + * Claims the global tty_mutex to serialize:
> + * - concurrent first-time tty initialization
> + * - concurrent tty driver removal w/ lookup
> + * - concurrent tty removal from driver table
> + */
> +struct tty_struct *tty_kopen(dev_t device)
> +{
> + struct tty_struct *tty;
> + struct tty_driver *driver = NULL;
> + int index = -1;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&tty_mutex);
> + driver = tty_lookup_driver(device, NULL, &index);
> + if (IS_ERR(driver)) {
> + mutex_unlock(&tty_mutex);
> + return ERR_CAST(driver);
> + }
> +
> + /* check whether we're reopening an existing tty */
> + tty = tty_driver_lookup_tty(driver, NULL, index);
> + if (IS_ERR(tty))
> + goto out;
> +
> + if (tty) {
> + tty_kref_put(tty); /* drop kref from tty_driver_lookup_tty() */
Put the comment above the line?
> + tty = ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
> + } else { /* Returns with the tty_lock held for now */
I don't understand this comment.
> + tty = tty_init_dev(driver, index);
> + set_bit(TTY_KOPENED, &tty->flags);
> + }
> +out:
> + mutex_unlock(&tty_mutex);
> + tty_driver_kref_put(driver);
> + return tty;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(tty_kopen);
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL()? :)
> +
> +/**
> * tty_open_by_driver - open a tty device
> * @device: dev_t of device to open
> * @inode: inode of device file
> @@ -1801,7 +1848,7 @@ static struct tty_driver *tty_lookup_dri
> * - concurrent tty driver removal w/ lookup
> * - concurrent tty removal from driver table
> */
> -struct tty_struct *tty_open_by_driver(dev_t device, struct inode *inode,
> +static struct tty_struct *tty_open_by_driver(dev_t device, struct inode *inode,
> struct file *filp)
> {
> struct tty_struct *tty;
> @@ -1824,6 +1871,12 @@ struct tty_struct *tty_open_by_driver(de
> }
>
> if (tty) {
> + if (test_bit(TTY_KOPENED, &tty->flags)) {
> + tty_kref_put(tty);
> + mutex_unlock(&tty_mutex);
> + tty = ERR_PTR(-EBUSY);
> + goto out;
> + }
> mutex_unlock(&tty_mutex);
> retval = tty_lock_interruptible(tty);
> tty_kref_put(tty); /* drop kref from tty_driver_lookup_tty() */
> @@ -1846,7 +1899,6 @@ out:
> tty_driver_kref_put(driver);
> return tty;
> }
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tty_open_by_driver);
>
> /**
> * tty_open - open a tty device
> --- a/include/linux/tty.h
> +++ b/include/linux/tty.h
> @@ -362,6 +362,7 @@ struct tty_file_private {
> #define TTY_NO_WRITE_SPLIT 17 /* Preserve write boundaries to driver */
> #define TTY_HUPPED 18 /* Post driver->hangup() */
> #define TTY_LDISC_HALTED 22 /* Line discipline is halted */
> +#define TTY_KOPENED 23 /* TTY exclusively opened by kernel */
Minor nit, please use tabs here.
Overall, the idea looks sane to me. Keeping userspace from opening a
tty that the kernel has opened internally makes sense, hopefully
userspace doesn't get too confused when that happens. I don't think we
normally return -EBUSY from an open call, have you seen what happens
with apps when you do this (like minicom?)
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-08 8:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-07 20:28 Okash Khawaja
2017-07-08 8:38 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2017-07-08 9:01 ` Okash Khawaja
2017-07-09 11:41 ` [patch 0/3] " Okash Khawaja
2017-07-09 11:41 ` [patch 1/3] tty: resolve tty contention between kernel and user space Okash Khawaja
2017-07-09 11:51 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-07-09 15:04 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-07-09 19:08 ` Okash Khawaja
2017-07-10 8:31 ` Okash Khawaja
2017-07-10 15:21 ` Andy Shevchenko
2017-07-10 16:12 ` Okash Khawaja
2017-07-09 11:41 ` [patch 2/3] staging: speakup: use tty_kopen instead of tty_open_by_driver Okash Khawaja
2017-07-09 11:50 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-07-09 12:28 ` Okash Khawaja
2017-07-09 11:41 ` [patch 3/3] tty: undo export " Okash Khawaja
2017-07-09 11:57 ` [patch 0/3] Re: tty contention resulting from tty_open_by_device export Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-07-09 12:32 ` [patch 4/3] tty: make tty_kopen return ENODEV in case of no TTY Okash Khawaja
2017-07-10 11:52 ` [patch 0/3] Re: tty contention resulting from tty_open_by_device export Alan Cox
2017-07-10 12:33 ` Okash Khawaja
2017-07-10 16:22 ` Okash Khawaja
2017-07-12 18:20 ` Alan Cox
2017-07-13 11:29 ` Okash Khawaja
2017-07-17 12:31 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2017-07-17 13:23 ` Okash Khawaja
2017-07-17 22:04 ` Alan Cox
2017-07-18 11:29 ` Okash Khawaja
2017-07-18 12:26 ` Dan Carpenter
2017-07-18 19:22 ` Okash Khawaja
2017-07-18 13:49 ` Alan Cox
2017-07-20 7:22 ` [patch v3 0/3] tty contention resulting from tty_open_by_driver export Okash Khawaja
2017-07-20 7:22 ` [patch v3 1/3] tty: resolve tty contention between kernel and user space Okash Khawaja
2017-07-20 7:22 ` [patch v3 2/3] staging: speakup: use tty_kopen and tty_kclose Okash Khawaja
2017-07-20 7:22 ` [patch v3 3/3] tty: undo export of tty_open_by_driver Okash Khawaja
2017-07-17 21:04 ` [patch v2 0/3] tty contention resulting from tty_open_by_driver export Okash Khawaja
2017-07-17 21:04 ` [patch v2 1/3] tty: resolve tty contention between kernel and user space Okash Khawaja
2017-07-17 21:04 ` [patch v2 2/3] staging: speakup: use tty_kopen instead of tty_open_by_driver Okash Khawaja
2017-07-17 21:04 ` [patch v2 3/3] tty: undo export " Okash Khawaja
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170708083803.GA23080@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=chris@the-brannons.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=jslaby@suse.com \
--cc=kirk@reisers.ca \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=okash.khawaja@gmail.com \
--cc=samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org \
--cc=speakup@linux-speakup.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome