public inbox for linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
Cc: ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
	Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@hp.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver core / ACPI: Avoid device removal locking problems
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2013 14:54:20 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130825215420.GB23446@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1543475.L7gSB7lLAu@vostro.rjw.lan>

On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 10:09:47PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> 
> There are two mutexes, device_hotplug_lock and acpi_scan_lock, held
> around the acpi_bus_trim() call in acpi_scan_hot_remove() which
> generally removes devices (it removes ACPI device objects at least,
> but it may also remove "physical" device objects through .detach()
> callbacks of ACPI scan handlers).  Thus, potentially, device sysfs
> attributes are removed under these locks and to remove those
> attributes it is necessary to hold the s_active references of their
> directory entries for writing.
> 
> On the other hand, the execution of a .show() or .store() callback
> from a sysfs attribute is carried out with that attribute's s_active
> reference held for reading.  Consequently, if any device sysfs
> attribute that may be removed from within acpi_scan_hot_remove()
> through acpi_bus_trim() has a .store() or .show() callback which
> acquires either acpi_scan_lock or device_hotplug_lock, the execution
> of that callback may deadlock with the removal of the attribute.
> [Unfortunately, the "online" device attribute of CPUs and memory
> blocks and the "eject" attribute of ACPI device objects are affected
> by this issue.]
> 
> To avoid those deadlocks introduce a new protection mechanism that
> can be used by the device sysfs attributes in question.  Namely,
> if a device sysfs attribute's .store() or .show() callback routine
> is about to acquire device_hotplug_lock or acpi_scan_lock, it can
> first execute read_lock_device_remove() and return an error code if
> that function returns false.  If true is returned, the lock in
> question may be acquired and read_unlock_device_remove() must be
> called.  [This mechanism is implemented by means of an additional
> rwsem in drivers/base/core.c.]
> 
> Make the affected sysfs attributes in the driver core and ACPI core
> use read_lock_device_remove() and read_unlock_device_remove() as
> described above.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
> Reported-by: Gu Zheng <guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>

Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-25 21:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-25 20:09 [PATCH] driver core / ACPI: Avoid device removal locking problems Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-25 21:54 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2013-08-26  3:13 ` Gu Zheng
2013-08-26 12:42   ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-26 14:43     ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-26 15:02       ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-27  3:26         ` Gu Zheng
2013-08-27  9:21         ` Gu Zheng
2013-08-27 18:36           ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-27 21:45             ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-28 10:03               ` Gu Zheng
2013-08-28 12:24               ` Tejun Heo
2013-08-28 13:24                 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-28 13:45                   ` [PATCH 0/2] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-28 13:48                     ` [PATCH 1/2] driver core / ACPI: Avoid device hot remove locking issues Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-28 18:53                       ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-08-29  2:02                       ` Gu Zheng
2013-08-28 13:51                     ` [PATCH 2/2] ACPI / hotplug: Remove containers synchronously Rafael J. Wysocki
2013-08-28 18:53                       ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2013-08-29  2:02                       ` Gu Zheng
2013-08-28 17:06                     ` [PATCH 0/2] driver core / ACPI: Avoid device removal locking problems Toshi Kani
2013-08-29  2:00                     ` Gu Zheng
2013-08-27 21:38           ` [PATCH] " Toshi Kani
2013-08-28  2:12             ` Gu Zheng
2013-08-28 16:55               ` Toshi Kani
2013-08-27  2:03       ` Gu Zheng
2013-08-27  2:38       ` Gu Zheng

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=20130825215420.GB23446@kroah.com \
    --to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
    --cc=toshi.kani@hp.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox