[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.00.0910082030010.12171@twin.jikos.cz>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 20:35:15 +0200 (CEST)
From: Jiri Kosina <jkosina@...e.cz>
To: Alexander Strakh <strakh@...ras.ru>
Cc: Pierre Ossman <pierre@...man.eu>, sdhci-devel@...ts.ossman.eu,
Linux Kernlel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] wbsd.c: after spin_lock_bh uses spin_unlock instead
spin_unlock_bh
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009, Alexander Strakh wrote:
> KERNEL_VERSION: 2.6.31
> DESCRIBE:
> Driver ./drivers/mmc/host/wbsd.c calls spin_lock_bh and then spin_unlock
> instead of spin_unlock_bh:
>
> 753 static void wbsd_request(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_request *mrq)
> ...
> 761 spin_lock_bh(&host->lock);
> ...
> 844 done:
> 845 wbsd_request_end(host, mrq);
> 846
> 847 spin_unlock_bh(&host->lock);
> 848 }
>
> But in wsdb_request calls spin_unlock/spin_lock instead of
> spin_unlock_bh/spin_lock_bh;
>
> 206 static void wbsd_request_end(struct wbsd_host *host, struct mmc_request
> ...
> 230 spin_unlock(&host->lock);
> 231 mmc_request_done(host->mmc, mrq);
> 232 spin_lock(&host->lock);
> 233 }
And where exactly you see a bug?
wbsd_request_end() can be called in the following ways:
- through wbsd_finish_data() from tasklet (therefore no need to disable
tasklets there)
- from wbsd_request() directly. The sequence here is
spin_lock_bh(&host->lock);
...
wbsd_request_end(host, mrq);
spin_unlock(&host->lock);
....
spin_lock(&host->lock);
spin_unlock_bh(&host->lock);
So the whole thing runs with tasklets disabled, no matter what you do
with the host->lock, and they are only enabled at the very end of
wbsd_request()
So, what exact problem scenario do you see here?
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
--
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