I wrote:
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Tue, 5 Sep 2006 10:37:51 -0700
>> "Miles Lane" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> ieee1394: Node changed: 0-01:1023 -> 0-00:1023
>>> ieee1394: Node changed: 0-02:1023 -> 0-01:1023
>>> ieee1394: Node suspended: ID:BUS[0-00:1023] GUID[0080880002103eae]
>>>
>>> =============================================
>>> [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
>>> 2.6.18-rc5-mm1 #2
>>> ---------------------------------------------
>>> knodemgrd_0/2321 is trying to acquire lock:
>>> (&s->rwsem){----}, at: [<f8958897>] nodemgr_probe_ne+0x311/0x38d [ieee1394]
>>>
>>> but task is already holding lock:
>>> (&s->rwsem){----}, at: [<f8959078>] nodemgr_host_thread+0x717/0x883 [ieee1394]
> [...]
>
> This information confuses me. These places are not supposed to be the
> ones where the locks were actually acquired, are they?
>
>> That's a 1394 glitch, possibly introduced by git-ieee1394.patch.
>
> Or maybe it's older. Nodemgr takes class->subsys.rwsem and
> device.bus->subsys.rwsem. It always did. Could there be a change in
> driver core which makes this recursive? Or has it always been recursive?
> For example,
>
> static void nodemgr_update_pdrv(struct node_entry *ne)
> {
> struct unit_directory *ud;
> struct hpsb_protocol_driver *pdrv;
> struct class *class = &nodemgr_ud_class;
> struct class_device *cdev;
>
> down_read(&class->subsys.rwsem);
> list_for_each_entry(cdev, &class->children, node) {
> ud = container_of(cdev, struct unit_directory, class_dev);
> if (ud->ne != ne || !ud->device.driver)
> continue;
>
> pdrv = container_of(ud->device.driver, struct hpsb_protocol_driver, driver);
>
> if (pdrv->update && pdrv->update(ud)) {
> down_write(&ud->device.bus->subsys.rwsem);
> device_release_driver(&ud->device);
> up_write(&ud->device.bus->subsys.rwsem);
> }
> }
> up_read(&class->subsys.rwsem);
> }
Hi Greg,
perhaps you could advise on this. It appears from grepping through the
sources that drivers/ieee1394/nodemgr.c is the only one with mixed
access to device.bus->subsys.rwsem and class->subsys.rwsem.
Other usages of subsys.rwsem that I found are:
1a.) dev->bus->subsys.rwsem
driver/ide/ide-proc.c and drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c take
dev->bus->subsys.rwsem. drivers/pnp/card.c takes dev.bus->subsys.rwsem.
1b.) driver.bus->subsys.rwsem
drivers/s390/net/qeth_proc.c takes driver.bus->subsys.rwsem.
2.) class->subsys.rwsem
drivers/scsi/hosts.c takes class->subsys.rwsem.
3.) bustype.subsys.rwsem
drivers/input/serio/serio.c takes serio_bus.subsys.rwsem.
drivers/input/gameport/gameport.c takes gameport_bus.subsys.rwsem.
drivers/base/power/shutdown.c takes devices_subsys.rwsem.
drivers/usb/core/devices.c and devio.c take usb_bus_type.subsys.rwsem.
Do class->subsys.rwsem, bus->subsys.rwsem, and bus_type.subsys.rwsem
point to identical or different lock instances?
Either way, could it hurt to convert nodemgr to uniformly use
ieee1394_bus_type.subsys.rwsem all over the place?
Thanks,
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-==- =--= --==-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
