From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from imap1.codethink.co.uk ([176.9.8.82]:52314 "EHLO imap1.codethink.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726870AbeILCGn (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Sep 2018 22:06:43 -0400 Message-ID: <1536699932.3024.161.camel@codethink.co.uk> Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 51/79] bnxt_en: Fix for system hang if request_irq fails From: Ben Hutchings To: Michael Chan Cc: Vikas Gupta , stable@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Sasha Levin , Greg Kroah-Hartman , LKML Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 22:05:32 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <20180823074918.641878835@linuxfoundation.org> <20180823074922.442947994@linuxfoundation.org> <1536696866.3024.151.camel@codethink.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2018-09-11 at 13:58 -0700, Michael Chan wrote: > On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 1:14 PM, Ben Hutchings > wrote: > > On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 09:53 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > 4.4-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please > > > let me know. > > > > > > ------------------ > > > > > > From: Vikas Gupta > > > > > > [ Upstream commit c58387ab1614f6d7fb9e244f214b61e7631421fc ] > > > > > > Fix bug in the error code path when bnxt_request_irq() returns > > > failure. > > > bnxt_disable_napi() should not be called in this error path > > > because > > > NAPI has not been enabled yet. > > > > [...] > > > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt.c > > > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt.c > > > @@ -4591,7 +4591,7 @@ static int __bnxt_open_nic(struct bnxt * > > >               rc = bnxt_request_irq(bp); > > >               if (rc) { > > >                       netdev_err(bp->dev, "bnxt_request_irq err: > > > %x\n", rc); > > > -                     goto open_err; > > > +                     goto open_err_irq; > > >               } > > >       } > > > > > > @@ -4629,6 +4629,8 @@ static int __bnxt_open_nic(struct bnxt * > > > > > >  open_err: > > >       bnxt_disable_napi(bp); > > > + > > > +open_err_irq: > > >       bnxt_del_napi(bp); > > > > Shouldn't this added statement be conditional on irq_re_init? > > > > Unconditional call is more correct, because when open fails, we clean > up everything, including the NAPI that was added just now or during a > previous call. > > In other words, the NAPI struct is always valid here whether > irq_re_init is true or not.  And we always delete it if open fails. OK, I see. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings, Software Developer   Codethink Ltd https://www.codethink.co.uk/ Dale House, 35 Dale Street Manchester, M1 2HF, United Kingdom