From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailgw01.mediatek.com (unknown [60.244.123.138]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A558E11720 for ; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 09:03:11 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=60.244.123.138 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710925394; cv=none; b=chjwKaVZWP43aaZfC0c8SILFHrGmZ8nggUWNPUAvkAjvmkxJ3yYCPzhEAJ6xoC7ILZjkggF9rGbstDIxjU5geTIdz9a3v2L18Ep9T5nuQA5bXFwnk3JI7AIIU1yvEwuDTE63Wf6FFp7qZzfCtMNBq7WTpa60/P6HPVGU7zp+u5I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710925394; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rSSBa2WZ0ivmSNOdA+rs77TZqcNDiDvF8dF8/aG6a+c=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=iRbUXnFpr+3Nx3xI/rLHd4EDsVoUQ2Zdhu21498H/6ahR3zrKwGHRpdupnmk7AWRPsmmYqY30zfyXUK5ZLiGRMe/k0oNNkkAKLuL4Gsfe80h9n4LqcnxGQ6+9KIwyHx3JCiuTvhy+l9Gf871acbtbKcrrvsbMRSurqdEI2kPgQg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=mediatek.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mediatek.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mediatek.com header.i=@mediatek.com header.b=czWUnAt7; arc=none smtp.client-ip=60.244.123.138 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=mediatek.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=mediatek.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mediatek.com header.i=@mediatek.com header.b="czWUnAt7" X-UUID: a5f40d5ce69811eeb8927bc1f75efef4-20240320 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mediatek.com; s=dk; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:CC:To:From; bh=lqxL/EcqF65J4vebvy58T+0FP8K0sKm33BQZcXi+Eck=; b=czWUnAt7EWvLxTyFgdKolvOfcx3TlpznMEgc3vg/NxO6ej3SgSEiPwRVXWJTpmaA3DW8QwHXPQGUy/NqUXvB6sowPqEsLTqNNcbc9IQH4LUqE2SjEs3osLEeGAu4IK3a37TUMZGE4sW42N6a+lHDxft9uss3aeeAMEY1iIMZiLs=; X-CID-P-RULE: Release_Ham X-CID-O-INFO: VERSION:1.1.37,REQID:bea5db0c-27c7-488c-8442-74be515d4624,IP:0,U RL:0,TC:0,Content:0,EDM:0,RT:0,SF:0,FILE:0,BULK:0,RULE:Release_Ham,ACTION: release,TS:0 X-CID-META: VersionHash:6f543d0,CLOUDID:3da41c00-c26b-4159-a099-3b9d0558e447,B ulkID:nil,BulkQuantity:0,Recheck:0,SF:102,TC:nil,Content:0,EDM:-3,IP:nil,U RL:0,File:nil,RT:nil,Bulk:nil,QS:nil,BEC:nil,COL:0,OSI:0,OSA:0,AV:0,LES:1, SPR:NO,DKR:0,DKP:0,BRR:0,BRE:0 X-CID-BVR: 0,NGT X-CID-BAS: 0,NGT,0,_ X-CID-FACTOR: TF_CID_SPAM_SNR X-UUID: a5f40d5ce69811eeb8927bc1f75efef4-20240320 Received: from mtkmbs13n2.mediatek.inc [(172.21.101.108)] by mailgw01.mediatek.com (envelope-from ) (Generic MTA with TLSv1.2 ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 256/256) with ESMTP id 1447634097; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 17:02:58 +0800 Received: from mtkmbs13n2.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.108) by mtkmbs10n2.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.183) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1118.26; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 17:02:57 +0800 Received: from mbjsdccf07.gcn.mediatek.inc (10.15.20.246) by mtkmbs13n2.mediatek.inc (172.21.101.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.2.1118.26 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 17:02:56 +0800 From: Guoyong Wang To: "Jason A . Donenfeld" , Theodore Ts'o , Tejun Heo , Lai Jiangshan , "Matthias Brugger" , AngeloGioacchino Del Regno CC: , , , , "Guoyong Wang" Subject: Re: [PATCH] random: Fix the issue of '_might_sleep' function running in an atomic contex Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 17:02:42 +0800 Message-ID: <20240320090242.10318-1-guoyong.wang@mediatek.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.18.0 In-Reply-To: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: SMEX-14.0.0.3152-9.1.1006-23728.005 X-TM-AS-Result: No-10--10.270600-8.000000 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: scwq2vQP8OFq0U6EhO9EEya1MaKuob8PC/ExpXrHizyo+b+yOP0oGAAt 9g7dvMC1IKdjJZRyIZmrMtdnoedbNxHzG0HT5tBb/1aBDnIV4ikWTveLitVUgcwHSQ+yXjTD/VQ G3oVfx34Pu+MfgwheR2w5+V5bC8rHsEBAuoaUqK8QNC45RlqcS167veYUroY0yWCL+8tLbvaPdB sWkfHN7SQPHPUuX+yXwFVmU96WjVi8f06ZoOZQY54CIKY/Hg3Am4n49vyf9XH6APa9i04WGCq2r l3dzGQ1wDQUlnxIhXnF3KvIbbLTLjwLy1kxf84msz8UF4jbTMVNVapMcyeuVg== X-TM-AS-User-Approved-Sender: No X-TM-AS-User-Blocked-Sender: No X-TMASE-Result: 10--10.270600-8.000000 X-TMASE-Version: SMEX-14.0.0.3152-9.1.1006-23728.005 X-TM-SNTS-SMTP: E24C5DBEC4A7B66132F1E1AFB2034EB23CBD72908B80C0880F7B0ABAD10D83592000:8 X-MTK: N On Web, 20 Mar 2024 02:09:21 +0100, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: >> Hi Jason, >> >> Thanks for your suggestions. >> >> I am inclined to accept your second suggestion. My reluctance to accept >> the first is due to the concern that "&& !in_atomic()" could potentially >> alter the original meaning of the 'execute_in_process_context' interface. >> Regarding the third suggestion, modifying the logic associated with 'input' >> is not recommended. > > Doesn't something like the below seem simplest? Just move the call out > of the spinlock and we're done. > > diff --git a/drivers/input/input-core-private.h b/drivers/input/input-core-private.h > index 116834cf8868..717f239e28d0 100644 > --- a/drivers/input/input-core-private.h > +++ b/drivers/input/input-core-private.h > @@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ > struct input_dev; > > void input_mt_release_slots(struct input_dev *dev); > -void input_handle_event(struct input_dev *dev, > +bool input_handle_event(struct input_dev *dev, > unsigned int type, unsigned int code, int value); > > #endif /* _INPUT_CORE_PRIVATE_H */ > diff --git a/drivers/input/input.c b/drivers/input/input.c > index f71ea4fb173f..2faf46218c66 100644 > --- a/drivers/input/input.c > +++ b/drivers/input/input.c > @@ -391,20 +391,22 @@ static void input_event_dispose(struct input_dev *dev, int disposition, > } > } > > -void input_handle_event(struct input_dev *dev, > +bool input_handle_event(struct input_dev *dev, > unsigned int type, unsigned int code, int value) > { > int disposition; > +bool should_contribute_to_rng = false; > > lockdep_assert_held(&dev->event_lock); > > disposition = input_get_disposition(dev, type, code, &value); > if (disposition != INPUT_IGNORE_EVENT) { > if (type != EV_SYN) > -add_input_randomness(type, code, value); > +should_contribute_to_rng = true; > > input_event_dispose(dev, disposition, type, code, value); > } > +return should_contribute_to_rng; > } > > /** > @@ -428,12 +430,15 @@ void input_event(struct input_dev *dev, > unsigned int type, unsigned int code, int value) > { > unsigned long flags; > +bool should_contribute_to_rng; > > if (is_event_supported(type, dev->evbit, EV_MAX)) { > > spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->event_lock, flags); > -input_handle_event(dev, type, code, value); > +should_contribute_to_rng = input_handle_event(dev, type, code, value); > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->event_lock, flags); > +if (should_contribute_to_rng) > +add_input_randomness(type, code, value); > } > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL(input_event); Hi Jason, Your proposal is not suitable for scenarios where input_event is called within an atomic context. For example: spin_lock(&dev->spinlock); input_event(dev, EV_ABS, ABS_X, x); spin_unlock(&dev->spinlock);