Re: [PATCH 2/9] crypto: qce - unregister previously registered algos in error path

[neil.armstrong@linaro.org]

On 03/12/2024 16:05, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 2:55 PM <neil.armstrong@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 03/12/2024 10:19, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
>>>
>>> If we encounter an error when registering alorithms with the crypto
>>> framework, we just bail out and don't unregister the ones we
>>> successfully registered in prior iterations of the loop.
>>>
>>> Add code that goes back over the algos and unregisters them before
>>> returning an error from qce_register_algs().
>>>
>>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
>>> Fixes: ec8f5d8f6f76 ("crypto: qce - Qualcomm crypto engine driver")
>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/crypto/qce/core.c | 11 +++++++----
>>>    1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/crypto/qce/core.c b/drivers/crypto/qce/core.c
>>> index 58ea93220f015..848e5e802b92b 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/crypto/qce/core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/crypto/qce/core.c
>>> @@ -51,16 +51,19 @@ static void qce_unregister_algs(struct qce_device *qce)
>>>    static int qce_register_algs(struct qce_device *qce)
>>>    {
>>>        const struct qce_algo_ops *ops;
>>> -     int i, ret = -ENODEV;
>>> +     int i, j, ret = -ENODEV;
>>>
>>>        for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(qce_ops); i++) {
>>>                ops = qce_ops[i];
>>>                ret = ops->register_algs(qce);
>>> -             if (ret)
>>> -                     break;
>>> +             if (ret) {
>>> +                     for (j = i - 1; j >= 0; j--)
>>> +                             ops->unregister_algs(qce);
>>> +                     return ret;
>>> +             }
>>>        }
>>>
>>> -     return ret;
>>> +     return 0;
>>>    }
>>>
>>>    static int qce_handle_request(struct crypto_async_request *async_req)
>>>
>>
>> Perhaps you can also use the devm trick here aswell ?
>>
> 
> I wanted to keep this one brief for backporting but I also think that
> scheduling a separate action here for every algo would be a bit
> overkill. This is quite concise so I'd keep it this way.

Sure understandable!

Reviewed-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@linaro.org>

> 
> Bart