[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 00:21:31 +0200
From: Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
To: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>,
Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: davicom: dm9000: dm9000_phy_write(): fix
deadlock during netdev watchdog handling
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de> :
> The dm9000 takes the db->lock spin lock in dm9000_timeout() and calls
> into dm9000_init_dm9000(). For the DM9000B the PHY is reset with
> dm9000_phy_write(). That function again takes the db->lock spin lock,
> which results in a deadlock. For reference the backtrace:
[...]
> To workaround similar problem (take mutex inside spin lock ) , a
> "in_timeout" variable was added in 582379839bbd ("dm9000: avoid
> sleeping in dm9000_timeout callback"). Use this variable and not take
> the spin lock inside dm9000_phy_write() if in_timeout is true.
>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
> ---
> During the netdev watchdog handling the dm9000 driver takes the same
> spin lock twice. Avoid this by extending an existing workaround.
> ---
I can review it but I can't really endorse it. :o)
Extending ugly workaround in pre-2000 style device drivers...
I'd rather see the thing fixed if there is some real use for it.
--
Ueimor
Powered by blists - more mailing lists