[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <592F6843.9000204@163.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2017 09:05:07 +0800
From: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@....com>
To: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
CC: kvalo@...eaurora.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
b43-dev@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] b43legacy: Fix a sleep-in-atomic bug in b43legacy_attr_interfmode_store
On 06/01/2017 01:33 AM, Larry Finger wrote:
> On 05/31/2017 05:29 AM, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
>> The driver may sleep under a spin lock, and the function call path is:
>> b43legacy_attr_interfmode_store (acquire the lock by spin_lock_irqsave)
>> b43legacy_radio_set_interference_mitigation
>> b43legacy_radio_interference_mitigation_disable
>> b43legacy_calc_nrssi_slope
>> b43legacy_synth_pu_workaround
>> might_sleep and msleep --> may sleep
>>
>> Fixing it may be complex, and a possible way is to remove
>> spin_lock_irqsave and spin_lock_irqrestore in
>> b43legacy_attr_interfmode_store, and the code has been protected by
>> mutex_lock and mutex_unlock.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@....com>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43legacy/sysfs.c | 2 --
>> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43legacy/sysfs.c
>> b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43legacy/sysfs.c
>> index 2a1da15..9ede143 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43legacy/sysfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43legacy/sysfs.c
>> @@ -137,14 +137,12 @@ static ssize_t
>> b43legacy_attr_interfmode_store(struct device *dev,
>> }
>> mutex_lock(&wldev->wl->mutex);
>> - spin_lock_irqsave(&wldev->wl->irq_lock, flags);
>> err = b43legacy_radio_set_interference_mitigation(wldev, mode);
>> if (err)
>> b43legacyerr(wldev->wl, "Interference Mitigation not "
>> "supported by device\n");
>> mmiowb();
>> - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&wldev->wl->irq_lock, flags);
>> mutex_unlock(&wldev->wl->mutex);
>> return err ? err : count;
>>
>
> Jia-Ju,
>
> Did you actually observe the attempt to sleep under the spin lock, or
> did you discover this using some tool? In other words, have either of
> your patches been tested?
>
> Larry
>
Hi,
In fact, my reported bugs are found by a static analysis tool written by
me, and they are checked by my review of the driver code.
I admit my patches are not well tested, and they may not well fix the bugs.
I am looking forward to opinions and suggestions :)
Thanks,
Jia-Ju Bai
Powered by blists - more mailing lists