Re: [PATCH] hwmon: chipcap2: serialize access to low/high_alarm indicators
Guenter Roeck <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.linux-hwmon,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.stable |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 8/21/26 02:22, Javier Carrasco wrote:
> Access to low_alarm and high_alarm from the threaded interrupt handlers
> and sysfs is not protected by any locking mechanism at the moment, which
> can lead to missed events.
>
> Add a per-interrupt mutex as the two alarm indicators are completely
> independent.
>
> Fixes: 3af350929e75 ("hwmon: Add support for Amphenol ChipCap 2")
> Cc: [email protected]
> Signed-off-by: Javier Carrasco <[email protected]>
> ---
> This issue was found by Sashiko[1] when an unrelated patch affected
> chipcap2.c. The issue is real as the access to the variables is not
> protected by any locking mechanism although 2 different sources
> (threaded interrupts and sysfs) could modify them.
>
> The fix has been validated on real hardware with an Amphenol
> ChipCap 2 CC2D23S sensor.
>
Needs explanation: Why can the hwmon subsystem lock not be used ?
Guenter
> Link: [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-hwmon/[email protected]/
> ---
> drivers/hwmon/chipcap2.c | 38 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/chipcap2.c b/drivers/hwmon/chipcap2.c
> index 086571d556b7..1bb4ec96514e 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/chipcap2.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/chipcap2.c
> @@ -73,7 +73,11 @@
>
> struct cc2_rh_alarm_info {
> bool low_alarm;
> + /* Serialize accesses to low_alarm from threaded IRQ and sysfs */
> + struct mutex low_alarm_lock;
> bool high_alarm;
> + /* Serialize accesses to high_alarm from threaded IRQ and sysfs */
> + struct mutex high_alarm_lock;
> bool low_alarm_visible;
> bool high_alarm_visible;
> };
> @@ -500,6 +504,7 @@ static irqreturn_t cc2_low_interrupt(int irq, void *data)
> if (cc2->process_irqs) {
> hwmon_notify_event(cc2->hwmon, hwmon_humidity,
> hwmon_humidity_min_alarm, CC2_CHAN_HUMIDITY);
> + guard(mutex)(&cc2->rh_alarm.low_alarm_lock);
> cc2->rh_alarm.low_alarm = true;
> }
>
> @@ -513,6 +518,7 @@ static irqreturn_t cc2_high_interrupt(int irq, void *data)
> if (cc2->process_irqs) {
> hwmon_notify_event(cc2->hwmon, hwmon_humidity,
> hwmon_humidity_max_alarm, CC2_CHAN_HUMIDITY);
> + guard(mutex)(&cc2->rh_alarm.high_alarm_lock);
> cc2->rh_alarm.high_alarm = true;
> }
>
> @@ -529,11 +535,13 @@ static int cc2_humidity_min_alarm_status(struct cc2_data *data, long *val)
> if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
>
> - if (data->rh_alarm.low_alarm) {
> - *val = (measurement < min_hyst) ? 1 : 0;
> - data->rh_alarm.low_alarm = *val;
> - } else {
> - *val = 0;
> + scoped_guard(mutex, &data->rh_alarm.low_alarm_lock) {
> + if (data->rh_alarm.low_alarm) {
> + *val = (measurement < min_hyst) ? 1 : 0;
> + data->rh_alarm.low_alarm = *val;
> + } else {
> + *val = 0;
> + }
> }
>
> return 0;
> @@ -549,11 +557,13 @@ static int cc2_humidity_max_alarm_status(struct cc2_data *data, long *val)
> if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
>
> - if (data->rh_alarm.high_alarm) {
> - *val = (measurement > max_hyst) ? 1 : 0;
> - data->rh_alarm.high_alarm = *val;
> - } else {
> - *val = 0;
> + scoped_guard(mutex, &data->rh_alarm.high_alarm_lock) {
> + if (data->rh_alarm.high_alarm) {
> + *val = (measurement > max_hyst) ? 1 : 0;
> + data->rh_alarm.high_alarm = *val;
> + } else {
> + *val = 0;
> + }
> }
>
> return 0;
> @@ -720,6 +730,14 @@ static int cc2_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> if (!data)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> + ret = devm_mutex_init(dev, &data->rh_alarm.low_alarm_lock);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + ret = devm_mutex_init(dev, &data->rh_alarm.high_alarm_lock);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> i2c_set_clientdata(client, data);
>
> data->client = client;
>
> ---
> base-commit: 818bebeb63dd6bf5f4e07e145f6cdbace520a34c
> change-id: 20260820-chipcap2_locks-c01013a24a0c
>
> Best regards,