From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: vinod.koul@intel.com (Vinod Koul) Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 23:00:13 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] dmaengine: ti-dma-crossbar: Fix possible race condition with dma_inuse In-Reply-To: <20170921113532.15297-1-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> References: <20170921113532.15297-1-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> Message-ID: <20170921173013.GL30097@localhost> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 02:35:32PM +0300, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > When looking for unused xbar_out lane we should also protect the set_bit() > call with the same mutex to protect against concurrent threads picking the > same ID. Applied, thanks Just a note, somehow the patches from you only are getting mangled for me. Curiously, the ones in patchworks are fine and I used to apply that, not sure what mail servers at our work places are doing!! > > Fixes: ec9bfa1e1a796 ("dmaengine: ti-dma-crossbar: dra7: Use bitops instead of idr") > Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi > Cc: stable at vger.kernel.org > --- > drivers/dma/ti-dma-crossbar.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/dma/ti-dma-crossbar.c b/drivers/dma/ti-dma-crossbar.c > index 10ef9d5d5a66..7df910e7c348 100644 > --- a/drivers/dma/ti-dma-crossbar.c > +++ b/drivers/dma/ti-dma-crossbar.c > @@ -262,13 +262,14 @@ static void *ti_dra7_xbar_route_allocate(struct of_phandle_args *dma_spec, > mutex_lock(&xbar->mutex); > map->xbar_out = find_first_zero_bit(xbar->dma_inuse, > xbar->dma_requests); > - mutex_unlock(&xbar->mutex); > if (map->xbar_out == xbar->dma_requests) { > + mutex_unlock(&xbar->mutex); > dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Run out of free DMA requests\n"); > kfree(map); > return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); > } > set_bit(map->xbar_out, xbar->dma_inuse); > + mutex_unlock(&xbar->mutex); > > map->xbar_in = (u16)dma_spec->args[0]; > > -- > 2.14.1 > > > Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki. Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki > > -- ~Vinod