| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <533517C1.8080208@freescale.com>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 14:33:37 +0800
From: Hongbo Zhang <hongbo.zhang@...escale.com>
To: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...radead.org>
CC: <vinod.koul@...el.com>, <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
<dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>, <scottwood@...escale.com>,
<LeoLi@...escale.com>, <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] DMA: Freescale: use spin_lock_bh instead of spin_lock_irqsave
On 03/26/2014 03:01 PM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-01-16 at 13:47 +0800, hongbo.zhang@...escale.com wrote:
>> From: Hongbo Zhang <hongbo.zhang@...escale.com>
>>
>> The usage of spin_lock_irqsave() is a stronger locking mechanism than is
>> required throughout the driver. The minimum locking required should be used
>> instead. Interrupts will be turned off and context will be saved, it is
>> unnecessary to use irqsave.
>>
>> This patch changes all instances of spin_lock_irqsave() to spin_lock_bh(). All
>> manipulation of protected fields is done using tasklet context or weaker, which
>> makes spin_lock_bh() the correct choice.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hongbo Zhang <hongbo.zhang@...escale.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Qiang Liu <qiang.liu@...escale.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/dma/fsldma.c | 25 ++++++++++---------------
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/dma/fsldma.c b/drivers/dma/fsldma.c
>> index bbace54..437794e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/dma/fsldma.c
>> +++ b/drivers/dma/fsldma.c
>> @@ -396,10 +396,9 @@ static dma_cookie_t fsl_dma_tx_submit(struct dma_async_tx_descriptor *tx)
>> struct fsldma_chan *chan = to_fsl_chan(tx->chan);
>> struct fsl_desc_sw *desc = tx_to_fsl_desc(tx);
>> struct fsl_desc_sw *child;
>> - unsigned long flags;
>> dma_cookie_t cookie = -EINVAL;
>>
>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> + spin_lock_bh(&chan->desc_lock);
>>
>> /*
>> * assign cookies to all of the software descriptors
>> @@ -412,7 +411,7 @@ static dma_cookie_t fsl_dma_tx_submit(struct dma_async_tx_descriptor *tx)
>> /* put this transaction onto the tail of the pending queue */
>> append_ld_queue(chan, desc);
>>
>> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> + spin_unlock_bh(&chan->desc_lock);
>>
>> return cookie;
>> }
>> @@ -731,15 +730,14 @@ static void fsldma_free_desc_list_reverse(struct fsldma_chan *chan,
>> static void fsl_dma_free_chan_resources(struct dma_chan *dchan)
>> {
>> struct fsldma_chan *chan = to_fsl_chan(dchan);
>> - unsigned long flags;
>>
>> chan_dbg(chan, "free all channel resources\n");
>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> + spin_lock_bh(&chan->desc_lock);
>> fsldma_cleanup_descriptors(chan);
>> fsldma_free_desc_list(chan, &chan->ld_pending);
>> fsldma_free_desc_list(chan, &chan->ld_running);
>> fsldma_free_desc_list(chan, &chan->ld_completed);
>> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> + spin_unlock_bh(&chan->desc_lock);
>>
>> dma_pool_destroy(chan->desc_pool);
>> chan->desc_pool = NULL;
>> @@ -958,7 +956,6 @@ static int fsl_dma_device_control(struct dma_chan *dchan,
>> {
>> struct dma_slave_config *config;
>> struct fsldma_chan *chan;
>> - unsigned long flags;
>> int size;
>>
>> if (!dchan)
>> @@ -968,7 +965,7 @@ static int fsl_dma_device_control(struct dma_chan *dchan,
>>
>> switch (cmd) {
>> case DMA_TERMINATE_ALL:
>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> + spin_lock_bh(&chan->desc_lock);
>>
>> /* Halt the DMA engine */
>> dma_halt(chan);
>> @@ -979,7 +976,7 @@ static int fsl_dma_device_control(struct dma_chan *dchan,
>> fsldma_free_desc_list(chan, &chan->ld_completed);
>> chan->idle = true;
>>
>> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> + spin_unlock_bh(&chan->desc_lock);
>> return 0;
>>
>> case DMA_SLAVE_CONFIG:
>> @@ -1021,11 +1018,10 @@ static int fsl_dma_device_control(struct dma_chan *dchan,
>> static void fsl_dma_memcpy_issue_pending(struct dma_chan *dchan)
>> {
>> struct fsldma_chan *chan = to_fsl_chan(dchan);
>> - unsigned long flags;
>>
>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> + spin_lock_bh(&chan->desc_lock);
>> fsl_chan_xfer_ld_queue(chan);
>> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> + spin_unlock_bh(&chan->desc_lock);
>> }
>>
>> /**
>> @@ -1124,11 +1120,10 @@ static irqreturn_t fsldma_chan_irq(int irq, void *data)
>> static void dma_do_tasklet(unsigned long data)
>> {
>> struct fsldma_chan *chan = (struct fsldma_chan *)data;
>> - unsigned long flags;
>>
>> chan_dbg(chan, "tasklet entry\n");
>>
>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> + spin_lock_bh(&chan->desc_lock);
> okay here is the problem :(
>
> You moved to _bh variant. So if you grab the lock in rest of the code
> and irq gets triggered then here we will be spinning to grab the lock.
> So effectively you made right locking solution into deadlock situation!
If the rest code grabs lock by spin_lock_bh(), and if irq raised, the
tasklet could not be executed because it has been disabled by the _bh
variant function.
Right?
>>
>> /* the hardware is now idle and ready for more */
>> chan->idle = true;
>> @@ -1136,7 +1131,7 @@ static void dma_do_tasklet(unsigned long data)
>> /* Run all cleanup for descriptors which have been completed */
>> fsldma_cleanup_descriptors(chan);
>>
>> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&chan->desc_lock, flags);
>> + spin_unlock_bh(&chan->desc_lock);
>>
>> chan_dbg(chan, "tasklet exit\n");
>> }
>
--
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