Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Why hold device_lock when calling callback in pci_walk_bus? | From | Huang Ying <> | Date | Fri, 28 Sep 2012 21:27:23 +0800 |
| |
Hi, Yanmin,
Thanks for your explain.
On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 02:29 -0600, Zhang, Yanmin wrote: > Some error handling functions call pci_walk_bus. For example, pci-e aer. Here we lock the device, so the driver wouldn't detach from the device, as the cb might call driver's callback function.
Still has two question.
1. Is it a good practice to hold device_lock when calling driver callback to prevent driver be unbind?
2. Is it a good idea to let callback of pci_walk_bus to acquire device_lock when necessary. Because pci_walk_bus may be used by driver callback too.
Best Regards, Huang Ying
> -----Original Message----- > From: Huang, Ying > Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 4:15 PM > To: bhelgaas@google.com > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman; Zhang, Yanmin; linux-pci@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; rjw@sisk.pl > Subject: Why hold device_lock when calling callback in pci_walk_bus? > > Hi, All, > > If my understanding were correct, device_lock is used to provide mutual exclusion between device probe/remove/suspend/resume etc. Why hold device_lock when calling callback in pci_walk_bus. > > This is introduced by the following commit. > > commit d71374dafbba7ec3f67371d3b7e9f6310a588808 > Author: Zhang Yanmin <yanmin.zhang@intel.com> > Date: Fri Jun 2 12:35:43 2006 +0800 > > [PATCH] PCI: fix race with pci_walk_bus and pci_destroy_dev > > pci_walk_bus has a race with pci_destroy_dev. When cb is called > in pci_walk_bus, pci_destroy_dev might unlink the dev pointed by next. > Later on in the next loop, pointer next becomes NULL and cause > kernel panic. > > Below patch against 2.6.17-rc4 fixes it by changing pci_bus_lock (spin_lock) > to pci_bus_sem (rw_semaphore). > > Signed-off-by: Zhang Yanmin <yanmin.zhang@intel.com> > Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de> > > Corresponding email thread is: https://lkml.org/lkml/2006/5/26/38 > > But from the commit and email thread, I can not find why we need to do that. > > I ask this question because I want to use pci_walk_bus in a function (in pci runtime resume path) which may be called with device_lock held. > > Can anyone help me on that? > > Best Regards, > Huang Ying > >
| |