From: David Collins <collinsd@codeaurora.org>
To: Liam Girdwood <lrg@slimlogic.co.uk>,
Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Deadlock scenario in regulator core
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 15:02:01 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D891C59.1030009@codeaurora.org> (raw)
Hi Liam and Mark,
I was analyzing the mutex lock usage in drivers/regulator/core.c and found
at least one way to reach deadlock: regulator_enable is called for a
regulator at the same time that regulator_disable is called for that
regulator's supply. Consider this simple example. There are two
regulators: S1 and L2, as well as two consumers: A and B. They are
connected as follows:
S1 --> L2 --> B
|
|--> A
Assume that A has already called regulator_enable for S1 some time in the
past.
Consumer A thread execution:
regulator_disable(S1)
mutex_lock(S1)
_regulator_disable(S1)
_notifier_call_chain(S1)
mutex_lock(L2)
Consumer B thread execution:
regulator_enable(L2)
mutex_lock(L2)
_regulator_enable(L2)
mutex_lock(S1)
The locks for S1 and L2 are taken in opposite orders in the two threads;
therefore, it is possible to achieve deadlock. I am not sure about the
best way to resolve this situation. Is there a correctness requirement
that regulator_enable holds the child regulator's lock when it attempts to
enable the parent regulator? Likewise, is the lock around
_notifier_call_chain required?
Thanks,
David Collins
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
next reply other threads:[~2011-03-22 22:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-22 22:02 David Collins [this message]
2011-03-22 22:31 ` Deadlock scenario in regulator core Mark Brown
2011-03-22 23:30 ` David Collins
2011-03-22 23:45 ` Mark Brown
2011-03-22 22:37 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-03-22 23:08 ` David Collins
2011-03-22 23:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-03-22 23:41 ` David Collins
2011-03-23 0:07 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-03-23 0:11 ` Mark Brown
2011-03-25 10:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-23 0:01 ` Mark Brown
2011-03-23 0:38 ` Steven Rostedt
2011-03-23 10:42 ` Mark Brown
2011-03-25 10:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2011-03-22 22:43 ` Mark Brown
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=4D891C59.1030009@codeaurora.org \
--to=collinsd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lrg@slimlogic.co.uk \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.