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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).