Thread (22 messages) 22 messages, 4 authors, 2015-04-08
STALE4088d

Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] drivers: PL011: avoid potential unregister_driver call

From: Russell King - ARM Linux <hidden>
Date: 2015-03-12 10:42:59
Also in: linux-arm-kernel

On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 05:59:45PM +0000, Andre Przywara wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Although we care about not unregistering the driver if there are
still ports connected during the .remove callback, we do miss this
check in the pl011_probe function. So if the current port allocation
fails, but there are other ports already registered, we will kill
those.
So factor out the port removal into a separate function and use that
in the probe function, too.

Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
---
 drivers/tty/serial/amba-pl011.c |   38 +++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/amba-pl011.c b/drivers/tty/serial/amba-pl011.c
index 92783fc..961f9b0 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/serial/amba-pl011.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/serial/amba-pl011.c
@@ -2235,6 +2235,24 @@ static int pl011_probe_dt_alias(int index, struct device *dev)
 	return ret;
 }
 
+/* unregisters the driver also if no more ports are left */
+static void pl011_unregister_port(struct uart_amba_port *uap)
+{
+	int i;
+	bool busy = false;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(amba_ports); i++) {
+		if (amba_ports[i] == uap)
+			amba_ports[i] = NULL;
+		else if (amba_ports[i])
+			busy = true;
+	}
+	pl011_dma_remove(uap);
+	if (!busy)
+		uart_unregister_driver(&amba_reg);
+}
This is still racy, as I pointed out at the time this crap was dreamt
up.

There is _no_ locking between an individual driver's ->probe or ->remove
functions being called concurrently for different devices.  The only
locking which the driver model guarantees is that a single struct device
can only be probed by one driver at a time.

Multiple struct device's can be in-progress of ->probe or ->remove
simultaneously.

However, this isn't your bug to solve... it's those who were proponents
of this crap approach.

-- 
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help