From: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org,
Alex Deucher <alexander.deucher@amd.com>,
Changcheng Deng <deng.changcheng@zte.com.cn>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>,
Zhen Lei <thunder.leizhen@huawei.com>,
linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] fbdev: Restart conflicting fb removal loop when unregistering devices
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2022 10:27:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44804419-0e83-b584-96d9-a35939b715bf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220420085303.100654-4-javierm@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4416 bytes --]
Hi
Am 20.04.22 um 10:53 schrieb Javier Martinez Canillas:
> Drivers that want to remove registered conflicting framebuffers prior to
> register their own framebuffer, calls remove_conflicting_framebuffers().
>
> This function takes the registration_lock mutex, to prevent a races when
> drivers register framebuffer devices. But if a conflicting framebuffer
> device is found, the underlaying platform device is unregistered and this
> will lead to the platform driver .remove callback to be called, which in
> turn will call to the unregister_framebuffer() that takes the same lock.
>
> To prevent this, a struct fb_info.forced_out field was used as indication
> to unregister_framebuffer() whether the mutex has to be grabbed or not.
>
> A cleaner solution is to drop the lock before platform_device_unregister()
> so unregister_framebuffer() can take it when called from the fbdev driver,
> and just grab the lock again after the device has been registered and do
> a removal loop restart.
I don't see how this patch improves the situation. So far,
do_remove_conflicting_framebuffers() had no business in maintaining
locks. And now it's doing this in in a goto-loop where it keeps
getting/dropping locks. That's asking for bugs IMHO.
Best regards
Thomas
>
> Since the framebuffer devices will already be removed, the loop would just
> finish when no more conflicting framebuffers are found.
>
> Suggested-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javierm@redhat.com>
> Reviewed-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> ---
>
> (no changes since v1)
>
> drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c | 22 +++++++++++++++-------
> include/linux/fb.h | 1 -
> 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c
> index 84427470367b..0bb459258df3 100644
> --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c
> +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/core/fbmem.c
> @@ -1553,6 +1553,7 @@ static void do_remove_conflicting_framebuffers(struct apertures_struct *a,
> {
> int i;
>
> +restart_removal:
> /* check all firmware fbs and kick off if the base addr overlaps */
> for_each_registered_fb(i) {
> struct apertures_struct *gen_aper;
> @@ -1585,12 +1586,23 @@ static void do_remove_conflicting_framebuffers(struct apertures_struct *a,
> pr_warn("fb%d: no device set\n", i);
> do_unregister_framebuffer(registered_fb[i]);
> } else if (dev_is_platform(device)) {
> - registered_fb[i]->forced_out = true;
> + /*
> + * Drop the lock because if the device is unregistered, its
> + * driver will call to unregister_framebuffer(), that takes
> + * this lock.
> + */
> + mutex_unlock(®istration_lock);
> platform_device_unregister(to_platform_device(device));
> + mutex_lock(®istration_lock);
> } else {
> pr_warn("fb%d: cannot remove device\n", i);
> do_unregister_framebuffer(registered_fb[i]);
> }
> + /*
> + * Restart the removal loop now that the device has been
> + * unregistered and its associated framebuffer gone.
> + */
> + goto restart_removal;
> }
> }
> }
> @@ -1897,13 +1909,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(register_framebuffer);
> void
> unregister_framebuffer(struct fb_info *fb_info)
> {
> - bool forced_out = fb_info->forced_out;
> -
> - if (!forced_out)
> - mutex_lock(®istration_lock);
> + mutex_lock(®istration_lock);
> do_unregister_framebuffer(fb_info);
> - if (!forced_out)
> - mutex_unlock(®istration_lock);
> + mutex_unlock(®istration_lock);
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(unregister_framebuffer);
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/fb.h b/include/linux/fb.h
> index f95da1af9ff6..b781bc721113 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fb.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fb.h
> @@ -502,7 +502,6 @@ struct fb_info {
> } *apertures;
>
> bool skip_vt_switch; /* no VT switch on suspend/resume required */
> - bool forced_out; /* set when being removed by another driver */
> };
>
> static inline struct apertures_struct *alloc_apertures(unsigned int max_num) {
--
Thomas Zimmermann
Graphics Driver Developer
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
(HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg)
Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 840 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-25 8:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-20 8:52 [PATCH v3 0/5] Fix some race conditions that exists between fbmem and sysfb Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-20 8:52 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] firmware: sysfb: Make sysfb_create_simplefb() return a pdev pointer Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-25 8:02 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-04-20 8:53 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] firmware: sysfb: Add helpers to unregister a pdev and disable registration Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-25 8:24 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-04-20 8:53 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] fbdev: Restart conflicting fb removal loop when unregistering devices Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-25 8:27 ` Thomas Zimmermann [this message]
2022-04-25 8:37 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-20 8:53 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] fbdev: Fix some race conditions between fbmem and sysfb Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-25 8:30 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-04-22 15:17 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] Fix some race conditions that exists " Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-04-25 8:54 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-04-25 9:15 ` Thomas Zimmermann
2022-04-25 9:49 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2022-04-29 7:47 ` Daniel Vetter
2022-04-29 8:06 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=44804419-0e83-b584-96d9-a35939b715bf@suse.de \
--to=tzimmermann@suse.de \
--cc=alexander.deucher@amd.com \
--cc=daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=deng.changcheng@zte.com.cn \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=javierm@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sam@ravnborg.org \
--cc=thunder.leizhen@huawei.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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®