* [PATCH] usb: gadget: composite: unlock spinlock before usb_gadget_disconnect()
@ 2014-06-13 11:28 Robert Baldyga
2014-06-13 11:36 ` David Laight
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Robert Baldyga @ 2014-06-13 11:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: balbi
Cc: gregkh, linux-usb, linux-kernel, m.szyprowski, andrzej.p, Robert Baldyga
usb_gadget_disconnect() shouldn't be called under spinlock to avoid
spinlock recursion. Function usb_gadget_disconnect() calls pullup(),
which is callback from UDC driver, usually calling composite_disconnect().
This function wants to lock spinlock used in usb_function_deactivate()
causing spinlock recursion.
Signed-off-by: Robert Baldyga <r.baldyga@samsung.com>
---
drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c
index d41103e..77cae4b 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c
@@ -260,8 +260,11 @@ int usb_function_deactivate(struct usb_function *function)
spin_lock_irqsave(&cdev->lock, flags);
- if (cdev->deactivations == 0)
+ if (cdev->deactivations == 0) {
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cdev->lock, flags);
status = usb_gadget_disconnect(cdev->gadget);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&cdev->lock, flags);
+ }
if (status == 0)
cdev->deactivations++;
--
1.9.1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] usb: gadget: composite: unlock spinlock before usb_gadget_disconnect()
2014-06-13 11:28 [PATCH] usb: gadget: composite: unlock spinlock before usb_gadget_disconnect() Robert Baldyga
@ 2014-06-13 11:36 ` David Laight
2014-06-19 13:48 ` Felipe Balbi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: David Laight @ 2014-06-13 11:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Robert Baldyga', balbi
Cc: gregkh, linux-usb, linux-kernel, m.szyprowski, andrzej.p
From: Robert Baldyga
> usb_gadget_disconnect() shouldn't be called under spinlock to avoid
> spinlock recursion. Function usb_gadget_disconnect() calls pullup(),
> which is callback from UDC driver, usually calling composite_disconnect().
> This function wants to lock spinlock used in usb_function_deactivate()
> causing spinlock recursion.
...
> +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c
> @@ -260,8 +260,11 @@ int usb_function_deactivate(struct usb_function *function)
>
> spin_lock_irqsave(&cdev->lock, flags);
>
> - if (cdev->deactivations == 0)
> + if (cdev->deactivations == 0) {
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cdev->lock, flags);
> status = usb_gadget_disconnect(cdev->gadget);
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&cdev->lock, flags);
> + }
> if (status == 0)
> cdev->deactivations++;
That sort of change rings big alarm bells.
You've effectively isolated the usb_gadget_disconnect() call
from the check that cdev->deactivations == 0.
And then you increment cdev->deactivations below.
Looks like it will be racy to me.
David
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] usb: gadget: composite: unlock spinlock before usb_gadget_disconnect()
2014-06-13 11:36 ` David Laight
@ 2014-06-19 13:48 ` Felipe Balbi
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Felipe Balbi @ 2014-06-19 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Laight
Cc: 'Robert Baldyga',
balbi, gregkh, linux-usb, linux-kernel, m.szyprowski, andrzej.p
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1246 bytes --]
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 11:36:24AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Robert Baldyga
> > usb_gadget_disconnect() shouldn't be called under spinlock to avoid
> > spinlock recursion. Function usb_gadget_disconnect() calls pullup(),
> > which is callback from UDC driver, usually calling composite_disconnect().
> > This function wants to lock spinlock used in usb_function_deactivate()
> > causing spinlock recursion.
> ...
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c
> > @@ -260,8 +260,11 @@ int usb_function_deactivate(struct usb_function *function)
> >
> > spin_lock_irqsave(&cdev->lock, flags);
> >
> > - if (cdev->deactivations == 0)
> > + if (cdev->deactivations == 0) {
> > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cdev->lock, flags);
> > status = usb_gadget_disconnect(cdev->gadget);
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&cdev->lock, flags);
> > + }
> > if (status == 0)
> > cdev->deactivations++;
>
> That sort of change rings big alarm bells.
> You've effectively isolated the usb_gadget_disconnect() call
> from the check that cdev->deactivations == 0.
> And then you increment cdev->deactivations below.
>
> Looks like it will be racy to me.
yes, it will. Fixing this requires a much more involved change.
--
balbi
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-06-19 13:48 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-06-13 11:28 [PATCH] usb: gadget: composite: unlock spinlock before usb_gadget_disconnect() Robert Baldyga
2014-06-13 11:36 ` David Laight
2014-06-19 13:48 ` Felipe Balbi
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®