[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.1202201524290.11040-100000@netrider.rowland.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 15:31:07 -0500 (EST)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
cc: Oliver Neukum <oliver@...kum.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/usbnet: avoid recursive locking in usbnet_stop()
On Mon, 20 Feb 2012, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 02/20/2012 05:21 PM, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> >> defer_bh() takes the lok which is hold during unlink_urbs(). The safe
> >> walk suggest that the skb will be removed from the list and this is done
> >> by defer_bh() so it seems to be okay to drop the lock here.
> >
> > I am afraid there's something wrong in the hcd driver. Async unlink must
> > be possible with a lock held. I cannot approve this patch.
>
> Hmmm. The comment above unlink() says that. Looking through other hcds
> it seems that musb is not the only one doing it wrong. Oh well...
What's the issue here?
If a driver calls usb_unlink_urb() while holding a lock, and the
completion routine tries to acquire the same lock, then deadlock is
possible. The fact that usb_unlink_urb() is asynchronous is not a
guarantee of anything; the HCD is allowed to call the completion
handler from within usb_unlink_urb().
It's true that the kerneldoc for usb_unlink_urb() says "This request is
always asynchronous". It might be a good idea to remove the word
"always", because it seems to give people the wrong idea.
Alan Stern
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists