From: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>
Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
driver-core@lists.linux.dev, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Mario Peter <mario.peter@leica-geosystems.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver core: take parent lock on deferred probe
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2026 16:51:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <as-XAQsMcCCklpoO@hovoldconsulting.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DM4MTGIILY95.YZSDZOIBBZZT@kernel.org>
On Wed, Oct 14, 2026 at 04:30:48PM +0200, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On Wed Oct 14, 2026 at 4:38 AM CEST, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On the other hand, there's something a bit weird about this whole thing.
> > The problem arises when you want to probe a device whose parent has been
> > deleted. Isn't there some sort of protection to prevent that from ever
> > happening? I mean, doesn't deleting a device imply that all its
> > descendants have been (or are in the process of being) deleted? And of
> > course, deleting and probing are mutually exclusive -- they can't race,
> > right?
>
> Yes, that's what the dev->p->dead check under the device lock protects against.
> But the new code accesses dev->parent before acquiring the device lock and
> reaching that check.
It's not just the new code; we have the same issue in __driver_attach()
bus_rescan_devices_helper() for synchronous probe too.
Johan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-14 14:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-13 14:06 [PATCH] driver core: take parent lock on deferred probe Johan Hovold
2026-10-13 14:24 ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-13 17:43 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-10-13 19:11 ` Alan Stern
2026-10-13 21:01 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-10-14 2:38 ` Alan Stern
2026-10-14 14:30 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-10-14 14:51 ` Johan Hovold [this message]
2026-10-14 8:15 ` Johan Hovold
2026-10-14 14:42 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-10-14 15:14 ` Johan Hovold
2026-10-14 22:40 ` Danilo Krummrich
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=as-XAQsMcCCklpoO@hovoldconsulting.com \
--to=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=driver-core@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mario.peter@leica-geosystems.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/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