[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <496798FE.8030900@s5r6.in-berlin.de>
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 19:35:42 +0100
From: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
CC: Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@...y.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Jay Fenlason <fenlason@...hat.com>
Subject: post 2.6.28 regression: device_initialize() now sleeps, and may fail
without recovery strategy
>From commit 2831fe6f9cc4e16c103504ee09a47a084297c0f3, "driver core:
create a private portion of struct device":
void device_initialize(struct device *dev)
{
+ dev->p = kzalloc(sizeof(*dev->p), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!dev->p) {
+ WARN_ON(1);
+ return;
+ }
+ dev->p->device = dev;
dev->kobj.kset = devices_kset;
kobject_init(&dev->kobj, &device_ktype);
First of all, this prevents initialization of struct device in atomic
contexts, such as drivers/firewire/fw-device.c::fw_node_event.
This is a bug in current mainline.
We can fix the bug by changing firewire-core, but
a) it'd be more than a one-liner,
b) who knows which other subsystems are affected.
Next, the above code is bogus. In 2.6.28, device_initialize() could
never fail and was thus safe to use as a void-valued function.
How does driver core handle dev->p == NULL in subsequent usages of dev now?
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-==--= ---= -=--=
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
--
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