Am 06.10.21 um 08:32 schrieb Lazar, Lijo:
On 10/6/2021 11:49 AM, Christian König wrote:
Am 06.10.21 um 06:51 schrieb Lazar, Lijo:
On 10/5/2021 10:15 PM, Christian König wrote:
Am 05.10.21 um 15:49 schrieb Das, Nirmoy:
On 10/5/2021 3:22 PM, Christian König wrote:
Am 05.10.21 um 15:11 schrieb Nirmoy Das: > Debugfs core APIs will throw -EPERM when user disables debugfs > using CONFIG_DEBUG_FS_ALLOW_NONE or with kernel param. We shouldn't > see that as an error. Also validate drm root dentry before creating > amdgpu debugfs files. > > Signed-off-by: Nirmoy Das nirmoy.das@amd.com > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_debugfs.c | 10 ++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_debugfs.c > b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_debugfs.c > index 6611b3c7c149..d786072e918b 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_debugfs.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_debugfs.c > @@ -1617,6 +1617,16 @@ int amdgpu_debugfs_init(struct > amdgpu_device *adev) > struct dentry *ent; > int r, i; > + if (IS_ERR(root)) { > + /* When debugfs is disabled we get -EPERM which is not an > + * error as this is user controllable. > + */
Well setting primary->debugfs_root to an error code is probably not a good idea to begin with.
When debugfs is disabled that should most likely be NULL.
If we set primary->debugfs_root to NULL then we need to add bunch of NULL checks everywhere before creating any debugfs files
because debugfs_create_{file|dir}() with NULL root is still valid. I am assuming a hypothetical case when debugfs_root dir creation fails even with debugfs enabled
but further calls are successful. This wont be a problem if we propagate the error code.
Yeah, but an error code in members is ugly like hell and potentially causes crashes instead.
I strongly suggest to fix this so that root is NULL when debugfs isn't available and we add proper checks for that instead.
This shouldn't be done. A NULL is a valid parent for debugfs API. An invalid parent is always checked like this if (IS_ERR(parent)) return parent;
Instead of adding redundant work like NULL checks, let the API do its work and don't break the API contract. For ex: usage of sample client, you may look at the drm usage; it does the same.
Yeah, but that is horrible API design and should be avoided.
ERR_PTR(), PTR_ERR(), IS_ERR() and similar are supposed to be used as alternative to signaling errors as return values from functions and should *never* ever be used to signal errors in pointer members.
One escape route may be - add another export from debugfs like debugfs_is_valid_node() which adheres to the current logic in debugfs API and use that in client code. Whenever debugfs changes to a different logic from IS_ERR, let that be changed.
Well that would then rather be drm_is_debugfs_enabled(), because that we separate debugfs handling into a drm core and individual drivers is drm specific.
Christian.
Thanks, Lijo
Regards, Christian.
Thanks, Lijo
Regards, Christian.
Regards,
Nirmoy
Regards, Christian.
> + if (PTR_ERR(root) == -EPERM) > + return 0; > + > + return PTR_ERR(ent); > + } > + > ent = debugfs_create_file("amdgpu_preempt_ib", 0600, root, > adev, > &fops_ib_preempt); > if (IS_ERR(ent)) {