RE: Dangerous devm_request_irq() conversions

[Jingoo Han <jg1.han@samsung.com>]

On Friday, February 22, 2013 4:27 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 04:12:36PM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
> > On Friday, February 22, 2013 3:54 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > It looks like a whole slew of devm_request_irq() conversions just got
> > > applied to mainline and many of them are quite broken.
> > >
> > > Consider fd5231ce336e038037b4f0190a6838bdd6e17c6d or
> > > c1879fe80c61f3be6f2ddb82509c2e7f92a484fe: the drivers udsed first to
> > > free IRQ and then unregister the corresponding device ensuring that IRQ
> > > handler, while it runs, has the device available. The mechanic
> > > conversion to devm_request_irq() reverses the order of these operations
> > > opening the race window where IRQ can reference device (or other
> > > resource) that is already gone.
> > >
> > > It would be nice if these could be reverted and revioewed again for
> > > correctness.
> >
> > Um, other RTC drivers already have been using devm_request_threaded_irq() or
> > devm_request_irq() like this, before I added these patches.
> >
> > For example,
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-tegra.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-spear.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-s3c.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-mxc.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-ds1553.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-ds1511.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-snvs.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-imxdi.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-tx4939.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-mv.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-coh901331.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-stk17ta8.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-lpc32xx.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-tps65910.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-rc5t583.c
> >
> >
> > Also, even more, some RTC drivers calls rtc_device_unregister() first,
> > then calls free_irq() later.
> >
> > For example,
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-vr41xx.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-da9052.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-isl1208.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-88pm860x.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-tps6586x.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-mpc5121.c
> > ./drivers/rtc/rtc-m48t59.c
> >
> >
> > Please, don't argue revert without concrete reasons.
> 
> What more concrete reason do you need? I explained to you the exact
> reason on the patches I noticed before and also on the 2 commits
> referenced above: blind conversion to devm_* changes order of operation
> which may be deadly with IRQs (but others, like clocks and regulators,
> are important too).
> 
> The fact that crap slipped in the kernel before is not the valid reason
> for adding more of the same crap.
> 
> Please *understand* APIs you are using before making changes.
> 
> >
> > If these devm_request_threaded_irq() or devm_request_irq() make the problem,
> > devm_free_irq() will be added later.
> 
> And the point? If you use devm_request_irq() and then call
> devm_free_irq() manually in all paths what you achieved is waste of
> memory required for devm_* tracking.

CC'ed Al Viro, Tejun Heo


So, is there any report that the devm_request_threaded_irq() makes
the deadly problem related IRQ in such cases?

According to your comment, it seems that there is no reason to use
devm_request_irq() or devm_request_threaded_irq().

Please, argue that it would be better to deprecate devm_request_irq()
or devm_request_threaded_irq().


> 
> --
> Dmitry