[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1001182206190.30446@ask.diku.dk>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 22:10:43 +0100 (CET)
From: Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
To: Andreas Mohr <andi@...as.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
Subject: Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> drivers/net/usb/mcs7830.c does several:
>
> mutex_lock(&dev->phy_mutex);
> /* write the MII command */
> ret = mcs7830_set_reg(dev, HIF_REG_PHY_CMD1, 2, cmd);
> if (ret < 0)
> goto out;
>
> /* wait for the data to become valid, should be within < 1ms */
> for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
> ret = mcs7830_get_reg(dev, HIF_REG_PHY_CMD1, 2, cmd);
> if ((ret < 0) || (cmd[1] &
> HIF_REG_PHY_CMD2_READY_FLAG_BIT))
> break;
> ret = -EIO;
> msleep(1);
> }
>
>
> Forgive me, but doesn't that mutex_lock()/msleep() (ab)use mean
> risking a "scheduling while atomic"?
> (such as discussed in e.g.
> http://search.luky.org/linux-kernel.2004/msg92817.html )
>
>
> And, if that is the case, shouldn't all such cases simply be killed for
> good via a capable semantic patch?
The semantic match shown below finds 55 matches. All but two involve
mutex_lock. Those are in the file
/var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
in the functions ehci_bus_suspend and ehci_hub_control.
julia
@@
@@
(
*mutex_lock(...)
|
*spin_lock(...)
|
*spin_lock_irq(...)
|
*spin_lock_irqsave(...)
)
... when != mutex_unlock(...)
when != spin_unlock(...)
when != spin_unlock_irq(...)
when != spin_unlock_irqrestore(...)
*msleep(...)
--
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