[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f04b6000-f128-f928-0e3e-e3acc206d2d1@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2022 23:41:49 +0800
From: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com>
To: jic23@...nel.org, lars@...afoo.de, valek@...cz,
gwendal@...omium.org
Cc: linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [BUG] iio: light: opt3001: possible deadlock in opt3001_read_raw()
and opt3001_irq()
Hello,
My static analysis tool reports a possible deadlock in the opt3001
driver in Linux 5.16:
opt3001_read_raw()
mutex_lock(&opt->lock); --> Line 399 (Lock A)
opt3001_get_lux()
wait_event_timeout(opt->result_ready_queue, ...) --> Line 276 (Wait X)
mutex_lock(&opt->lock); --> Line 412 (Unlock A)
opt3001_irq()
mutex_lock(&opt->lock); --> Line 693 (Lock A)
mutex_unlock(&opt->lock); --> Line 730 (Unlock A)
wake_up(&opt->result_ready_queue); --> Line 733 (Wake X)
When opt3001_read_raw() is executed, "Wait X" is performed by holding
"Lock A". If opt3001_irq() is executed at this time, "Wake X" cannot be
performed to wake up "Wait X" in opt3001_read_raw(), because "Lock A"
has been already hold by opt3001_read_raw(), causing a possible deadlock.
I find that "Wait X" is performed with a timeout, to relieve the
possible deadlock; but I think this timeout can cause inefficient execution.
I am not quite sure whether this possible problem is real and how to fix
it if it is real.
Any feedback would be appreciated, thanks :)
Best wishes,
Jia-Ju Bai
Powered by blists - more mailing lists