linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.39-rc2 regression: X201s fails to resume b77dcf8460ae57d4eb9fd3633eb4f97b8fb20716

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1104111807480.4501@localhost6.localdomain6>
Date:	Mon, 11 Apr 2011 18:12:22 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:	Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...nbossa.org>
cc:	Keith Packard <keithp@...thp.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.39-rc2 regression: X201s fails to resume
 b77dcf8460ae57d4eb9fd3633eb4f97b8fb20716

On Fri, 8 Apr 2011, Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:

> Hi Keith,
> 
> On 16:13 Fri 08 Apr, Keith Packard wrote:
> > On Fri, 8 Apr 2011 23:44:51 +0200 (CEST), Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> > 
> > > Can the bluetooth folks please have a look at that ASAP? The obvious
> > > fast fix for Linus tree is to revert the second hunk for now, but this
> > > needs to be fixed proper.
> > 
> > Who will submit this patch? I'd rather have your name on it so that
> > people come complain at you...
> 
> I took a shot at it and just sent a patch (also attached for convenience) 
> that should solve the problem.

Aaarg. No. That patch reverts both hunks.

--- a/net/bluetooth/hci_core.c
+++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_core.c
@@ -586,9 +586,6 @@ static int hci_dev_do_close(struct hci_dev *hdev)
 	hci_req_cancel(hdev, ENODEV);
 	hci_req_lock(hdev);
 
-	/* Stop timer, it might be running */
-	del_timer_sync(&hdev->cmd_timer);
-
 	if (!test_and_clear_bit(HCI_UP, &hdev->flags)) {
 		hci_req_unlock(hdev);
 		return 0;

As I said before you need that first hunk to stay for the case where
there is no device up and you return via the !HCI_UP check. You just
moved back to the state before as the stupid timer is active for
whatever reason even when HCI_UP is not set.

@@ -618,6 +615,9 @@ static int hci_dev_do_close(struct hci_dev *hdev)
 		clear_bit(HCI_INIT, &hdev->flags);
 	}
 
+	/* Stop timer, it might be running */
+	del_timer_sync(&hdev->cmd_timer);
+
 	/* Kill cmd task */
 	tasklet_kill(&hdev->cmd_task);
--
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/