[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <11DE897D-FD47-4F22-9F12-FE258B30D000@holtmann.org>
Date: Sun, 1 Jun 2008 09:06:22 +0200
From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
To: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, arjan@...ux.intel.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][resend] rfcomm deadlock fix
Hi Dave,
> There's logic in __rfcomm_dlc_close:
> rfcomm_dlc_lock(d);
> d->state = BT_CLOSED;
> d->state_changed(d, err);
> rfcomm_dlc_unlock(d);
>
> In rfcomm_dev_state_change, it's possible that rfcomm_dev_put try to
> take the
> dlc lock, then we will deadlock.
>
> Here fixed it by unlock dlc before rfcomm_dev_get in
> rfcomm_dev_state_change.
>
> why not unlock just before rfcomm_dev_put? it's because there's
> another problem.
> rfcomm_dev_get/rfcomm_dev_del will take rfcomm_dev_lock, but in
> rfcomm_dev_add
> the lock order is : rfcomm_dev_lock --> dlc lock
>
> so I unlock dlc before the taken of rfcomm_dev_lock.
>
> Actually it's a regression caused by commit
> 1905f6c736cb618e07eca0c96e60e3c024023428, the dlc state_change could
> be two
> callbacks : rfcomm_sk_state_change and rfcomm_dev_state_change. I
> missed the rfcomm_sk_state_change that time.
>
> Thanks Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> for the effort in
> commit
> 4c8411f8c115def968820a4df6658ccfd55d7f1a
> but he missed the rfcomm_dev_state_change lock issue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>
>
> ---
> net/bluetooth/rfcomm/tty.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff -upr linux/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/tty.c linux.new/net/bluetooth/
> rfcomm/tty.c
> --- linux/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/tty.c 2008-05-30 15:46:33.000000000
> +0800
> +++ linux.new/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/tty.c 2008-05-30
> 17:08:30.000000000 +0800
> @@ -566,11 +566,22 @@ static void rfcomm_dev_state_change(stru
> if (dlc->state == BT_CLOSED) {
> if (!dev->tty) {
> if (test_bit(RFCOMM_RELEASE_ONHUP, &dev->flags)) {
> - if (rfcomm_dev_get(dev->id) == NULL)
> + /* Drop DLC lock here to avoid deadlock
> + * 1. rfcomm_dev_get will take rfcomm_dev_lock
> + * but in rfcomm_dev_add there's lock order:
> + * rfcomm_dev_lock -> dlc lock
> + * 2. rfcomm_dev_put will deaklock if it's
> + * the last reference
I meant this one :) s/deaklock/deadlock/
Regards
Marcel
--
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