[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20230926102914.6145-1-dg573847474@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2023 10:29:14 +0000
From: Chengfeng Ye <dg573847474@...il.com>
To: linus.walleij@...aro.org, brgl@...ev.pl, andy@...nel.org,
alex@...uggie.ro, aboutphysycs@...il.com
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Chengfeng Ye <dg573847474@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH] gpio: timberdale: Fix potential deadlock on &tgpio->lock
As timbgpio_irq_enable()/timbgpio_irq_disable() callback could be
executed under irq context, it could introduce double locks on
&tgpio->lock if it preempts other execution units requiring
the same locks.
timbgpio_gpio_set()
--> timbgpio_update_bit()
--> spin_lock(&tgpio->lock)
<interrupt>
--> timbgpio_irq_disable()
--> spin_lock_irqsave(&tgpio->lock)
This flaw was found by an experimental static analysis tool I am
developing for irq-related deadlock.
To prevent the potential deadlock, the patch uses spin_lock_irqsave()
on &tgpio->lock inside timbgpio_gpio_set() to prevent the possible
deadlock scenario.
Signed-off-by: Chengfeng Ye <dg573847474@...il.com>
---
drivers/gpio/gpio-timberdale.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-timberdale.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-timberdale.c
index bbd9e9191199..fad979797486 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-timberdale.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-timberdale.c
@@ -43,9 +43,10 @@ static int timbgpio_update_bit(struct gpio_chip *gpio, unsigned index,
unsigned offset, bool enabled)
{
struct timbgpio *tgpio = gpiochip_get_data(gpio);
+ unsigned long flags;
u32 reg;
- spin_lock(&tgpio->lock);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&tgpio->lock, flags);
reg = ioread32(tgpio->membase + offset);
if (enabled)
@@ -54,7 +55,7 @@ static int timbgpio_update_bit(struct gpio_chip *gpio, unsigned index,
reg &= ~(1 << index);
iowrite32(reg, tgpio->membase + offset);
- spin_unlock(&tgpio->lock);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&tgpio->lock, flags);
return 0;
}
--
2.17.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists