[PATCH 3/6] drivers/misc/sgi-xp: convert nested spin_lock_irqsave

[PATCH 3/6] drivers/misc/sgi-xp: convert nested spin_lock_irqsave

[Julia Lawall]

From: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>

If spin_lock_irqsave is called twice in a row with the same second
argument, the interrupt state at the point of the second call overwrites
the value saved by the first call.  Indeed, the second call does not need
to save the interrupt state, so it is changed to a simple spin_lock.

The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows:
(http://www.emn.fr/x-info/coccinelle/)

// <smpl>
@@
expression lock1,lock2;
expression flags;
@@

*spin_lock_irqsave(lock1,flags)
... when != flags
*spin_lock_irqsave(lock2,flags)
// </smpl>

Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>

---
 drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c        |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c b/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c
index c76677a..d0052ad 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c
@@ -443,9 +443,9 @@ xpc_handle_activate_mq_msg_uv(struct xpc_partition *part,
 
 		if (msg->activate_gru_mq_desc_gpa ! 		    part_uv->activate_gru_mq_desc_gpa) {
-			spin_lock_irqsave(&part_uv->flags_lock, irq_flags);
+			spin_lock(&part_uv->flags_lock);
 			part_uv->flags &= ~XPC_P_CACHED_ACTIVATE_GRU_MQ_DESC_UV;
-			spin_unlock_irqrestore(&part_uv->flags_lock, irq_flags);
+			spin_unlock(&part_uv->flags_lock);
 			part_uv->activate_gru_mq_desc_gpa  			    msg->activate_gru_mq_desc_gpa;
 		}

Re: [PATCH 3/6] drivers/misc/sgi-xp: convert nested

[Robin Holt]

On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 05:23:57PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> -			spin_lock_irqsave(&part_uv->flags_lock, irq_flags);
> +			spin_lock(&part_uv->flags_lock);
>  			part_uv->flags &= ~XPC_P_CACHED_ACTIVATE_GRU_MQ_DESC_UV;

Please do not change this.

I think this is a false positive to a automated script.  We are not
comparing against the processors irq flags, but rather against the
partitions flags.  Note above the difference between irq_flags and
part_uv->flags.

Maybe I misunderstand your point in this patch.

Robin

Re: [PATCH 3/6] drivers/misc/sgi-xp: convert nested

[Robin Holt]

You reason description confused me at first.  After looking closer at
the code, I understand and agree.

Acked-by: Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>

On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 05:23:57PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> From: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
> 
> If spin_lock_irqsave is called twice in a row with the same second
> argument, the interrupt state at the point of the second call overwrites
> the value saved by the first call.  Indeed, the second call does not need
> to save the interrupt state, so it is changed to a simple spin_lock.
> 
> The semantic match that finds this problem is as follows:
> (http://www.emn.fr/x-info/coccinelle/)
> 
> // <smpl>
> @@
> expression lock1,lock2;
> expression flags;
> @@
> 
> *spin_lock_irqsave(lock1,flags)
> ... when != flags
> *spin_lock_irqsave(lock2,flags)
> // </smpl>
> 
> Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
> 
> ---
>  drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c        |    4 ++--
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c b/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c
> index c76677a..d0052ad 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c
> @@ -443,9 +443,9 @@ xpc_handle_activate_mq_msg_uv(struct xpc_partition *part,
>  
>  		if (msg->activate_gru_mq_desc_gpa !>  		    part_uv->activate_gru_mq_desc_gpa) {
> -			spin_lock_irqsave(&part_uv->flags_lock, irq_flags);
> +			spin_lock(&part_uv->flags_lock);
>  			part_uv->flags &= ~XPC_P_CACHED_ACTIVATE_GRU_MQ_DESC_UV;
> -			spin_unlock_irqrestore(&part_uv->flags_lock, irq_flags);
> +			spin_unlock(&part_uv->flags_lock);
>  			part_uv->activate_gru_mq_desc_gpa >  			    msg->activate_gru_mq_desc_gpa;
>  		}
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/