[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070502142014.b1f1d77e.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 2 May 2007 14:20:14 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "Markus Rechberger" <markus.rechberger@....com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Dominik Brodowski <linux@...inikbrodowski.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pcmcia/pccard deadlock fix
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2007 16:08:11 +0100
20 Feb was a long time ago, sorry. I was hoping to feed the pcmcia patches
through Dominik but I think he's busy with exams or such. So I get to
pretend to be pcmcia maintainer.
"Markus Rechberger" <markus.rechberger@....com> wrote:
> following patch prevents a mutex/semaphore deadlock within the pcmcia
> framework when ejecting devices multiple times using pccardctl eject.
>
> For some more details see:
> http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/2/19/58
>
> Signed-off-by: Markus Rechberger <markus.rechberger@....com>
>
> --
> Markus Rechberger
> Operating System Research Center
> AMD Saxony LLC & Co. KG
>
>
>
> [pcmcia-pccard-deadlock-fix.diff text/plain (757B)]
> index ac00424..c02bf0d 100644
> --- a/drivers/pcmcia/cs.c
> +++ b/drivers/pcmcia/cs.c
> @@ -856,7 +856,8 @@ int pcmcia_eject_card(struct pcmcia_socket *skt)
>
> cs_dbg(skt, 1, "user eject request\n");
>
> - mutex_lock(&skt->skt_mutex);
> + if (!mutex_trylock(&skt->skt_mutex))
> + return -EAGAIN;
> do {
> if (!(skt->state & SOCKET_PRESENT)) {
> ret = -ENODEV;
> index 18e111e..b9d3440 100644
> --- a/drivers/pcmcia/ds.c
> +++ b/drivers/pcmcia/ds.c
> @@ -1100,7 +1100,9 @@ static ssize_t pcmcia_store_allow_func_id_match(struct device *dev,
> if (!count)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> - mutex_lock(&p_dev->socket->skt_mutex);
> + if (!mutex_trylock(&p_dev->socket->skt_mutex))
> + return -EAGAIN;
> +
> p_dev->allow_func_id_match = 1;
> mutex_unlock(&p_dev->socket->skt_mutex);
>
This is a pretty sad-looking solution. Does it not mean that sometimes
user-initiated actions will mysteriously fail?
Are you able to provide a more detailed description of why/how the deadlock
actually occurs so that perhaps a more robust fix can be implemented?
Thanks.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists