From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: dedekind1@gmail.com
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, computersforpeace@gmail.com,
dwmw2@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: Fix possible deadlock in erase_worker()
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 11:46:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <541BFB6D.3040903@nod.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1410946526.28850.120.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
Am 17.09.2014 11:35, schrieb Artem Bityutskiy:
> On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 09:48 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> If sync_erase() failes with EINTR, ENOMEM, EAGAIN or
>> EBUSY erase_worker() re-schedules the failed work.
>> This will lead to a deadlock because erase_worker() is called
>> with work_sem held in read mode. And schedule_erase() will take
>> this lock again.
>
> There is this code snippet:
>
> ubi_err("failed to erase PEB %d, error %d", pnum, err);
> kfree(wl_wrk);
>
> if (err == -EINTR || err == -ENOMEM || err == -EAGAIN ||
> err == -EBUSY) {
> int err1;
>
> /* Re-schedule the LEB for erasure */
> err1 = schedule_erase(ubi, e, vol_id, lnum, 0);
> if (err1) {
> err = err1;
> goto out_ro;
> }
> return err;
> }
>
> How about move 'kfree(wl_wrk)' down, and execute
>
> __schedule_ubi_work(ubi, wl_wrk)
>
> inside the 'if' clause instead? The fix would seem to be more elegant
> then.
>
> Hmm?
Yes, that would work too.
Or we apply "[PATCH 1/2] UBI: Call worker functions without work_sem held". :)
Thanks,
//richard
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
To: dedekind1@gmail.com
Cc: dwmw2@infradead.org, computersforpeace@gmail.com,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] UBI: Fix possible deadlock in erase_worker()
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 11:46:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <541BFB6D.3040903@nod.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1410946526.28850.120.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com>
Am 17.09.2014 11:35, schrieb Artem Bityutskiy:
> On Tue, 2014-09-16 at 09:48 +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> If sync_erase() failes with EINTR, ENOMEM, EAGAIN or
>> EBUSY erase_worker() re-schedules the failed work.
>> This will lead to a deadlock because erase_worker() is called
>> with work_sem held in read mode. And schedule_erase() will take
>> this lock again.
>
> There is this code snippet:
>
> ubi_err("failed to erase PEB %d, error %d", pnum, err);
> kfree(wl_wrk);
>
> if (err == -EINTR || err == -ENOMEM || err == -EAGAIN ||
> err == -EBUSY) {
> int err1;
>
> /* Re-schedule the LEB for erasure */
> err1 = schedule_erase(ubi, e, vol_id, lnum, 0);
> if (err1) {
> err = err1;
> goto out_ro;
> }
> return err;
> }
>
> How about move 'kfree(wl_wrk)' down, and execute
>
> __schedule_ubi_work(ubi, wl_wrk)
>
> inside the 'if' clause instead? The fix would seem to be more elegant
> then.
>
> Hmm?
Yes, that would work too.
Or we apply "[PATCH 1/2] UBI: Call worker functions without work_sem held". :)
Thanks,
//richard
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-19 9:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-16 7:48 [PATCH] UBI: Fix possible deadlock in erase_worker() Richard Weinberger
2014-09-16 7:48 ` Richard Weinberger
2014-09-17 8:28 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2014-09-17 8:28 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2014-09-17 8:40 ` Richard Weinberger
2014-09-17 8:40 ` Richard Weinberger
2014-09-17 8:43 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2014-09-17 8:43 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2014-09-17 9:35 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2014-09-17 9:35 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2014-09-19 9:46 ` Richard Weinberger [this message]
2014-09-19 9:46 ` Richard Weinberger
2014-09-19 10:47 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2014-09-19 10:47 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2014-09-19 11:01 ` Richard Weinberger
2014-09-19 11:01 ` Richard Weinberger
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=541BFB6D.3040903@nod.at \
--to=richard@nod.at \
--cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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.