Re: [PATCH v2] HID: Replace semaphore driver_lock with mutex
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Date: 2017-06-14 07:20:51
Also in:
lkml
On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 7:22 AM, Binoy Jayan [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi, On 14 June 2017 at 01:55, Arnd Bergmann [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
quoted
The mutex code clearly states mutex_trylock() must not be used in interrupt context (see kernel/locking/mutex.c), hence we used a semaphore here. Unless the mutex code is changed to allow this, we cannot switch away from semaphores.Right, that makes a lot of sense. I don't think changing the mutex code is an option here, but I wonder if we can replace the semaphore with something simpler anyway. From what I can tell, it currently does two things: 1. it acts as a simple flag to prevent hid_input_report from derefencing the hid->driver pointer during initialization and exit. I think this could be done equally well using a simple atomic set_bit()/test_bit() or similar. 2. it prevents the hid->driver pointer from becoming invalid while an asynchronous hid_input_report() is in progress. This actually seems to be a reference counting problem rather than a locking problem. I don't immediately see how to better address it, or how exactly this could go wrong in practice, but I would naively expect that either hdev->driver->remove() needs to wait for the last user of hdev->driver to complete, or we need kref_get/kref_put in hid_input_report() to trigger the actual release function.Thank you everyone for the comments. I'll resend the patch with Benjamin's comments incorporated and address the changes in the second semaphore later.
I hope that David or someone else can provide some more feedback on
my interpretation above first so we can decide how this should be
handled. Right now, I wouldn't know how to address point 2 above.
Arnd