| Message ID | 1221140080-9853-3-git-send-email-sebastien.dugue@bull.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Commit | 2eefbd63d0c85daa1317636474c226e236beba81 |
| Headers | show |
Sebastien Dugue wrote: > Looks like to me that the ehea_fw_handles.lock mutex and the > ehea_bcmc_regs.lock spinlock are taken much longer than necessary and could > as well be pushed inside the functions that need them > (ehea_update_firmware_handles() and ehea_update_bcmc_registrations()) > rather than at each callsite. > > Signed-off-by: Sebastien Dugue <sebastien.dugue@bull.net> > --- > drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c | 26 ++++---------------------- > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > index b70c531..c765ec6 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > @@ -219,9 +219,11 @@ static void ehea_update_firmware_handles(void) > } > > out_update: > + mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > kfree(ehea_fw_handles.arr); > ehea_fw_handles.arr = arr; > ehea_fw_handles.num_entries = i; > + mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > } > > static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) > @@ -293,9 +295,11 @@ static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) > } > > out_update: > + spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > kfree(ehea_bcmc_regs.arr); > ehea_bcmc_regs.arr = arr; > ehea_bcmc_regs.num_entries = i; > + spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > } > > static struct net_device_stats *ehea_get_stats(struct net_device *dev) > @@ -1770,8 +1774,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) > > memcpy(dev->dev_addr, mac_addr->sa_data, dev->addr_len); > > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > - > /* Deregister old MAC in pHYP */ > if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) { > ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); > @@ -1792,7 +1794,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) > > out_upregs: > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > out_free: > kfree(cb0); > out: > @@ -1954,8 +1955,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) > } > ehea_promiscuous(dev, 0); > > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > - > if (dev->flags & IFF_ALLMULTI) { > ehea_allmulti(dev, 1); > goto out; > @@ -1985,7 +1984,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) > } > out: > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > return; > } > > @@ -2466,8 +2464,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) > if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) > return 0; > > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > - > ret = ehea_port_res_setup(port, port->num_def_qps, > port->num_add_tx_qps); > if (ret) { > @@ -2504,8 +2500,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) > } > } > > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > - > ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_REG_BCMC); > if (ret) { > ret = -EIO; > @@ -2527,10 +2521,8 @@ out: > ehea_info("Failed starting %s. ret=%i", dev->name, ret); > > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > return ret; > } > @@ -2580,9 +2572,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_DOWN) > return 0; > > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > - > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > ehea_drop_multicast_list(dev); > ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); > > @@ -2591,7 +2580,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > port->state = EHEA_PORT_DOWN; > > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > ret = ehea_clean_all_portres(port); > if (ret) > @@ -2599,7 +2587,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > dev->name, ret); > > ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > return ret; > } > @@ -3378,7 +3365,6 @@ static int __devinit ehea_probe_adapter(struct of_device *dev, > ehea_error("Invalid ibmebus device probed"); > return -EINVAL; > } > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > adapter = kzalloc(sizeof(*adapter), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!adapter) { > @@ -3462,7 +3448,6 @@ out_free_ad: > > out: > ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > return ret; > } > > @@ -3481,8 +3466,6 @@ static int __devexit ehea_remove(struct of_device *dev) > > flush_scheduled_work(); > > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > - > ibmebus_free_irq(adapter->neq->attr.ist1, adapter); > tasklet_kill(&adapter->neq_tasklet); applied
NACK! I regret but this patch is wrong. It is not sufficient to only lock the replacement of an old list with a new list. Building up those lists is a 3-step process: 1. Count the number of entries a list will contain and allocate mem 2. Fill the list 3. Replace old list with updated list It's obvious that the contents of the list may not change during this procedure. That means that not only the list build-up procedure must be locked. It must be assured that no function that modifies the list's content can be called while another list update is in progress. Jeff, please revert this patch. Thanks Thomas Sebastien Dugue wrote: > Looks like to me that the ehea_fw_handles.lock mutex and the > ehea_bcmc_regs.lock spinlock are taken much longer than necessary and could > as well be pushed inside the functions that need them > (ehea_update_firmware_handles() and ehea_update_bcmc_registrations()) > rather than at each callsite. > > Signed-off-by: Sebastien Dugue <sebastien.dugue@bull.net> > --- > drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c | 26 ++++---------------------- > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > index b70c531..c765ec6 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > @@ -219,9 +219,11 @@ static void ehea_update_firmware_handles(void) > } > > out_update: > + mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > kfree(ehea_fw_handles.arr); > ehea_fw_handles.arr = arr; > ehea_fw_handles.num_entries = i; > + mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > } > > static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) > @@ -293,9 +295,11 @@ static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) > } > > out_update: > + spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > kfree(ehea_bcmc_regs.arr); > ehea_bcmc_regs.arr = arr; > ehea_bcmc_regs.num_entries = i; > + spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > } > > static struct net_device_stats *ehea_get_stats(struct net_device *dev) > @@ -1770,8 +1774,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) > > memcpy(dev->dev_addr, mac_addr->sa_data, dev->addr_len); > > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > - > /* Deregister old MAC in pHYP */ > if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) { > ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); > @@ -1792,7 +1794,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) > > out_upregs: > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > out_free: > kfree(cb0); > out: > @@ -1954,8 +1955,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) > } > ehea_promiscuous(dev, 0); > > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > - > if (dev->flags & IFF_ALLMULTI) { > ehea_allmulti(dev, 1); > goto out; > @@ -1985,7 +1984,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) > } > out: > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > return; > } > > @@ -2466,8 +2464,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) > if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) > return 0; > > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > - > ret = ehea_port_res_setup(port, port->num_def_qps, > port->num_add_tx_qps); > if (ret) { > @@ -2504,8 +2500,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) > } > } > > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > - > ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_REG_BCMC); > if (ret) { > ret = -EIO; > @@ -2527,10 +2521,8 @@ out: > ehea_info("Failed starting %s. ret=%i", dev->name, ret); > > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > return ret; > } > @@ -2580,9 +2572,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_DOWN) > return 0; > > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > - > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > ehea_drop_multicast_list(dev); > ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); > > @@ -2591,7 +2580,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > port->state = EHEA_PORT_DOWN; > > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > ret = ehea_clean_all_portres(port); > if (ret) > @@ -2599,7 +2587,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > dev->name, ret); > > ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > return ret; > } > @@ -3378,7 +3365,6 @@ static int __devinit ehea_probe_adapter(struct of_device *dev, > ehea_error("Invalid ibmebus device probed"); > return -EINVAL; > } > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > adapter = kzalloc(sizeof(*adapter), GFP_KERNEL); > if (!adapter) { > @@ -3462,7 +3448,6 @@ out_free_ad: > > out: > ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > return ret; > } > > @@ -3481,8 +3466,6 @@ static int __devexit ehea_remove(struct of_device *dev) > > flush_scheduled_work(); > > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > - > ibmebus_free_irq(adapter->neq->attr.ist1, adapter); > tasklet_kill(&adapter->neq_tasklet); > > @@ -3492,7 +3475,6 @@ static int __devexit ehea_remove(struct of_device *dev) > kfree(adapter); > > ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > return 0; > }
On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 17:18:27 +0200 Thomas Klein <osstklei@de.ibm.com> wrote: > NACK! > > I regret but this patch is wrong. It is not sufficient to only lock > the replacement of an old list with a new list. Building up those > lists is a 3-step process: > > 1. Count the number of entries a list will contain and allocate mem > 2. Fill the list > 3. Replace old list with updated list > > It's obvious that the contents of the list may not change during this > procedure. That means that not only the list build-up procedure must > be locked. It must be assured that no function that modifies the list's > content can be called while another list update is in progress. > > Jeff, please revert this patch. OK, your call, you know the code better than I do. But the locking could at least be pushed into ehea_update_firmware_handles() and ehea_update_bcmc_registrations() instead of being at each call site. Thanks, Sebastien. > > Thanks > Thomas > > > > Sebastien Dugue wrote: > > Looks like to me that the ehea_fw_handles.lock mutex and the > > ehea_bcmc_regs.lock spinlock are taken much longer than necessary and could > > as well be pushed inside the functions that need them > > (ehea_update_firmware_handles() and ehea_update_bcmc_registrations()) > > rather than at each callsite. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sebastien Dugue <sebastien.dugue@bull.net> > > --- > > drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c | 26 ++++---------------------- > > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > > index b70c531..c765ec6 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > > @@ -219,9 +219,11 @@ static void ehea_update_firmware_handles(void) > > } > > > > out_update: > > + mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > kfree(ehea_fw_handles.arr); > > ehea_fw_handles.arr = arr; > > ehea_fw_handles.num_entries = i; > > + mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > } > > > > static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) > > @@ -293,9 +295,11 @@ static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) > > } > > > > out_update: > > + spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > kfree(ehea_bcmc_regs.arr); > > ehea_bcmc_regs.arr = arr; > > ehea_bcmc_regs.num_entries = i; > > + spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > } > > > > static struct net_device_stats *ehea_get_stats(struct net_device *dev) > > @@ -1770,8 +1774,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) > > > > memcpy(dev->dev_addr, mac_addr->sa_data, dev->addr_len); > > > > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > - > > /* Deregister old MAC in pHYP */ > > if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) { > > ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); > > @@ -1792,7 +1794,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) > > > > out_upregs: > > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > out_free: > > kfree(cb0); > > out: > > @@ -1954,8 +1955,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) > > } > > ehea_promiscuous(dev, 0); > > > > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > - > > if (dev->flags & IFF_ALLMULTI) { > > ehea_allmulti(dev, 1); > > goto out; > > @@ -1985,7 +1984,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) > > } > > out: > > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > return; > > } > > > > @@ -2466,8 +2464,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) > > if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) > > return 0; > > > > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > - > > ret = ehea_port_res_setup(port, port->num_def_qps, > > port->num_add_tx_qps); > > if (ret) { > > @@ -2504,8 +2500,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) > > } > > } > > > > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > - > > ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_REG_BCMC); > > if (ret) { > > ret = -EIO; > > @@ -2527,10 +2521,8 @@ out: > > ehea_info("Failed starting %s. ret=%i", dev->name, ret); > > > > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > > > ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > > - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > > > return ret; > > } > > @@ -2580,9 +2572,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > > if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_DOWN) > > return 0; > > > > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > - > > - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > ehea_drop_multicast_list(dev); > > ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); > > > > @@ -2591,7 +2580,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > > port->state = EHEA_PORT_DOWN; > > > > ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > > - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > > > > ret = ehea_clean_all_portres(port); > > if (ret) > > @@ -2599,7 +2587,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > > dev->name, ret); > > > > ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > > - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > > > return ret; > > } > > @@ -3378,7 +3365,6 @@ static int __devinit ehea_probe_adapter(struct of_device *dev, > > ehea_error("Invalid ibmebus device probed"); > > return -EINVAL; > > } > > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > > > adapter = kzalloc(sizeof(*adapter), GFP_KERNEL); > > if (!adapter) { > > @@ -3462,7 +3448,6 @@ out_free_ad: > > > > out: > > ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > > - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > return ret; > > } > > > > @@ -3481,8 +3466,6 @@ static int __devexit ehea_remove(struct of_device *dev) > > > > flush_scheduled_work(); > > > > - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > - > > ibmebus_free_irq(adapter->neq->attr.ist1, adapter); > > tasklet_kill(&adapter->neq_tasklet); > > > > @@ -3492,7 +3475,6 @@ static int __devexit ehea_remove(struct of_device *dev) > > kfree(adapter); > > > > ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > > - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > > > > return 0; > > } > > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxppc-dev mailing list > Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev >
Sebastien Dugue wrote: > On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 17:18:27 +0200 Thomas Klein <osstklei@de.ibm.com> wrote: > >> NACK! >> >> I regret but this patch is wrong. It is not sufficient to only lock >> the replacement of an old list with a new list. Building up those >> lists is a 3-step process: >> >> 1. Count the number of entries a list will contain and allocate mem >> 2. Fill the list >> 3. Replace old list with updated list >> >> It's obvious that the contents of the list may not change during this >> procedure. That means that not only the list build-up procedure must >> be locked. It must be assured that no function that modifies the list's >> content can be called while another list update is in progress. >> >> Jeff, please revert this patch. > > OK, your call, you know the code better than I do. > > But the locking could at least be pushed into ehea_update_firmware_handles() > and ehea_update_bcmc_registrations() instead of being at each call site. > > Thanks, > > Sebastien. > It unfortunately can't. As I already mentioned "it must be assured that no function that modifies the list's content can be called while another list update is in progress". This means that for example ehea_broadcast_reg_helper() may not run during a list update. That's why the locks surround these function calls as well. Thomas >> Thanks >> Thomas >> >> >> >> Sebastien Dugue wrote: >>> Looks like to me that the ehea_fw_handles.lock mutex and the >>> ehea_bcmc_regs.lock spinlock are taken much longer than necessary and could >>> as well be pushed inside the functions that need them >>> (ehea_update_firmware_handles() and ehea_update_bcmc_registrations()) >>> rather than at each callsite. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sebastien Dugue <sebastien.dugue@bull.net> >>> --- >>> drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c | 26 ++++---------------------- >>> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c >>> index b70c531..c765ec6 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c >>> +++ b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c >>> @@ -219,9 +219,11 @@ static void ehea_update_firmware_handles(void) >>> } >>> >>> out_update: >>> + mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); >>> kfree(ehea_fw_handles.arr); >>> ehea_fw_handles.arr = arr; >>> ehea_fw_handles.num_entries = i; >>> + mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); >>> } >>> >>> static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) >>> @@ -293,9 +295,11 @@ static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) >>> } >>> >>> out_update: >>> + spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); >>> kfree(ehea_bcmc_regs.arr); >>> ehea_bcmc_regs.arr = arr; >>> ehea_bcmc_regs.num_entries = i; >>> + spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); >>> } >>> >>> static struct net_device_stats *ehea_get_stats(struct net_device *dev) >>> @@ -1770,8 +1774,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) >>> >>> memcpy(dev->dev_addr, mac_addr->sa_data, dev->addr_len); >>> >>> - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); >>> - >>> /* Deregister old MAC in pHYP */ >>> if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) { >>> ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); >>> @@ -1792,7 +1794,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) >>> >>> out_upregs: >>> ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); >>> - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); >>> out_free: >>> kfree(cb0); >>> out: >>> @@ -1954,8 +1955,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) >>> } >>> ehea_promiscuous(dev, 0); >>> >>> - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); >>> - >>> if (dev->flags & IFF_ALLMULTI) { >>> ehea_allmulti(dev, 1); >>> goto out; >>> @@ -1985,7 +1984,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) >>> } >>> out: >>> ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); >>> - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); >>> return; >>> } >>> >>> @@ -2466,8 +2464,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) >>> if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) >>> return 0; >>> >>> - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); >>> - >>> ret = ehea_port_res_setup(port, port->num_def_qps, >>> port->num_add_tx_qps); >>> if (ret) { >>> @@ -2504,8 +2500,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) >>> } >>> } >>> >>> - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); >>> - >>> ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_REG_BCMC); >>> if (ret) { >>> ret = -EIO; >>> @@ -2527,10 +2521,8 @@ out: >>> ehea_info("Failed starting %s. ret=%i", dev->name, ret); >>> >>> ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); >>> - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); >>> >>> ehea_update_firmware_handles(); >>> - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); >>> >>> return ret; >>> } >>> @@ -2580,9 +2572,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) >>> if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_DOWN) >>> return 0; >>> >>> - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); >>> - >>> - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); >>> ehea_drop_multicast_list(dev); >>> ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); >>> >>> @@ -2591,7 +2580,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) >>> port->state = EHEA_PORT_DOWN; >>> >>> ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); >>> - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); >>> >>> ret = ehea_clean_all_portres(port); >>> if (ret) >>> @@ -2599,7 +2587,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) >>> dev->name, ret); >>> >>> ehea_update_firmware_handles(); >>> - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); >>> >>> return ret; >>> } >>> @@ -3378,7 +3365,6 @@ static int __devinit ehea_probe_adapter(struct of_device *dev, >>> ehea_error("Invalid ibmebus device probed"); >>> return -EINVAL; >>> } >>> - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); >>> >>> adapter = kzalloc(sizeof(*adapter), GFP_KERNEL); >>> if (!adapter) { >>> @@ -3462,7 +3448,6 @@ out_free_ad: >>> >>> out: >>> ehea_update_firmware_handles(); >>> - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); >>> return ret; >>> } >>> >>> @@ -3481,8 +3466,6 @@ static int __devexit ehea_remove(struct of_device *dev) >>> >>> flush_scheduled_work(); >>> >>> - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); >>> - >>> ibmebus_free_irq(adapter->neq->attr.ist1, adapter); >>> tasklet_kill(&adapter->neq_tasklet); >>> >>> @@ -3492,7 +3475,6 @@ static int __devexit ehea_remove(struct of_device *dev) >>> kfree(adapter); >>> >>> ehea_update_firmware_handles(); >>> - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); >>> >>> return 0; >>> } >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Linuxppc-dev mailing list >> Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org >> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev >>
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 11:13:13 +0200 Thomas Klein <osstklei@de.ibm.com> wrote: > Sebastien Dugue wrote: > > On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 17:18:27 +0200 Thomas Klein <osstklei@de.ibm.com> wrote: > > > >> NACK! > >> > >> I regret but this patch is wrong. It is not sufficient to only lock > >> the replacement of an old list with a new list. Building up those > >> lists is a 3-step process: > >> > >> 1. Count the number of entries a list will contain and allocate mem > >> 2. Fill the list > >> 3. Replace old list with updated list > >> > >> It's obvious that the contents of the list may not change during this > >> procedure. That means that not only the list build-up procedure must > >> be locked. It must be assured that no function that modifies the list's > >> content can be called while another list update is in progress. > >> > >> Jeff, please revert this patch. > > > > OK, your call, you know the code better than I do. > > > > But the locking could at least be pushed into ehea_update_firmware_handles() > > and ehea_update_bcmc_registrations() instead of being at each call site. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Sebastien. > > > > It unfortunately can't. As I already mentioned "it must be assured that no > function that modifies the list's content can be called while another list > update is in progress". This means that for example ehea_broadcast_reg_helper() > may not run during a list update. That's why the locks surround these function > calls as well. OK, I see. Thanks, Sebastien. > > Thomas > > > >> Thanks > >> Thomas > >> > >> > >> > >> Sebastien Dugue wrote: > >>> Looks like to me that the ehea_fw_handles.lock mutex and the > >>> ehea_bcmc_regs.lock spinlock are taken much longer than necessary and could > >>> as well be pushed inside the functions that need them > >>> (ehea_update_firmware_handles() and ehea_update_bcmc_registrations()) > >>> rather than at each callsite. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Sebastien Dugue <sebastien.dugue@bull.net> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c | 26 ++++---------------------- > >>> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > >>> index b70c531..c765ec6 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c > >>> @@ -219,9 +219,11 @@ static void ehea_update_firmware_handles(void) > >>> } > >>> > >>> out_update: > >>> + mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > >>> kfree(ehea_fw_handles.arr); > >>> ehea_fw_handles.arr = arr; > >>> ehea_fw_handles.num_entries = i; > >>> + mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > >>> } > >>> > >>> static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) > >>> @@ -293,9 +295,11 @@ static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) > >>> } > >>> > >>> out_update: > >>> + spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > >>> kfree(ehea_bcmc_regs.arr); > >>> ehea_bcmc_regs.arr = arr; > >>> ehea_bcmc_regs.num_entries = i; > >>> + spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > >>> } > >>> > >>> static struct net_device_stats *ehea_get_stats(struct net_device *dev) > >>> @@ -1770,8 +1774,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) > >>> > >>> memcpy(dev->dev_addr, mac_addr->sa_data, dev->addr_len); > >>> > >>> - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > >>> - > >>> /* Deregister old MAC in pHYP */ > >>> if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) { > >>> ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); > >>> @@ -1792,7 +1794,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) > >>> > >>> out_upregs: > >>> ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > >>> - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > >>> out_free: > >>> kfree(cb0); > >>> out: > >>> @@ -1954,8 +1955,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) > >>> } > >>> ehea_promiscuous(dev, 0); > >>> > >>> - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > >>> - > >>> if (dev->flags & IFF_ALLMULTI) { > >>> ehea_allmulti(dev, 1); > >>> goto out; > >>> @@ -1985,7 +1984,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) > >>> } > >>> out: > >>> ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > >>> - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > >>> return; > >>> } > >>> > >>> @@ -2466,8 +2464,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) > >>> if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) > >>> return 0; > >>> > >>> - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > >>> - > >>> ret = ehea_port_res_setup(port, port->num_def_qps, > >>> port->num_add_tx_qps); > >>> if (ret) { > >>> @@ -2504,8 +2500,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) > >>> } > >>> } > >>> > >>> - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > >>> - > >>> ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_REG_BCMC); > >>> if (ret) { > >>> ret = -EIO; > >>> @@ -2527,10 +2521,8 @@ out: > >>> ehea_info("Failed starting %s. ret=%i", dev->name, ret); > >>> > >>> ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > >>> - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > >>> > >>> ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > >>> - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > >>> > >>> return ret; > >>> } > >>> @@ -2580,9 +2572,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > >>> if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_DOWN) > >>> return 0; > >>> > >>> - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > >>> - > >>> - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > >>> ehea_drop_multicast_list(dev); > >>> ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); > >>> > >>> @@ -2591,7 +2580,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > >>> port->state = EHEA_PORT_DOWN; > >>> > >>> ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); > >>> - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); > >>> > >>> ret = ehea_clean_all_portres(port); > >>> if (ret) > >>> @@ -2599,7 +2587,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) > >>> dev->name, ret); > >>> > >>> ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > >>> - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > >>> > >>> return ret; > >>> } > >>> @@ -3378,7 +3365,6 @@ static int __devinit ehea_probe_adapter(struct of_device *dev, > >>> ehea_error("Invalid ibmebus device probed"); > >>> return -EINVAL; > >>> } > >>> - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > >>> > >>> adapter = kzalloc(sizeof(*adapter), GFP_KERNEL); > >>> if (!adapter) { > >>> @@ -3462,7 +3448,6 @@ out_free_ad: > >>> > >>> out: > >>> ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > >>> - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > >>> return ret; > >>> } > >>> > >>> @@ -3481,8 +3466,6 @@ static int __devexit ehea_remove(struct of_device *dev) > >>> > >>> flush_scheduled_work(); > >>> > >>> - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > >>> - > >>> ibmebus_free_irq(adapter->neq->attr.ist1, adapter); > >>> tasklet_kill(&adapter->neq_tasklet); > >>> > >>> @@ -3492,7 +3475,6 @@ static int __devexit ehea_remove(struct of_device *dev) > >>> kfree(adapter); > >>> > >>> ehea_update_firmware_handles(); > >>> - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); > >>> > >>> return 0; > >>> } > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Linuxppc-dev mailing list > >> Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > >> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev > >> > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxppc-dev mailing list > Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev >
diff --git a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c index b70c531..c765ec6 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c +++ b/drivers/net/ehea/ehea_main.c @@ -219,9 +219,11 @@ static void ehea_update_firmware_handles(void) } out_update: + mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); kfree(ehea_fw_handles.arr); ehea_fw_handles.arr = arr; ehea_fw_handles.num_entries = i; + mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); } static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) @@ -293,9 +295,11 @@ static void ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(void) } out_update: + spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); kfree(ehea_bcmc_regs.arr); ehea_bcmc_regs.arr = arr; ehea_bcmc_regs.num_entries = i; + spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); } static struct net_device_stats *ehea_get_stats(struct net_device *dev) @@ -1770,8 +1774,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) memcpy(dev->dev_addr, mac_addr->sa_data, dev->addr_len); - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); - /* Deregister old MAC in pHYP */ if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) { ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); @@ -1792,7 +1794,6 @@ static int ehea_set_mac_addr(struct net_device *dev, void *sa) out_upregs: ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); out_free: kfree(cb0); out: @@ -1954,8 +1955,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) } ehea_promiscuous(dev, 0); - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); - if (dev->flags & IFF_ALLMULTI) { ehea_allmulti(dev, 1); goto out; @@ -1985,7 +1984,6 @@ static void ehea_set_multicast_list(struct net_device *dev) } out: ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); return; } @@ -2466,8 +2464,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_UP) return 0; - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); - ret = ehea_port_res_setup(port, port->num_def_qps, port->num_add_tx_qps); if (ret) { @@ -2504,8 +2500,6 @@ static int ehea_up(struct net_device *dev) } } - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); - ret = ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_REG_BCMC); if (ret) { ret = -EIO; @@ -2527,10 +2521,8 @@ out: ehea_info("Failed starting %s. ret=%i", dev->name, ret); ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); ehea_update_firmware_handles(); - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); return ret; } @@ -2580,9 +2572,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) if (port->state == EHEA_PORT_DOWN) return 0; - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); - - spin_lock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); ehea_drop_multicast_list(dev); ehea_broadcast_reg_helper(port, H_DEREG_BCMC); @@ -2591,7 +2580,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) port->state = EHEA_PORT_DOWN; ehea_update_bcmc_registrations(); - spin_unlock(&ehea_bcmc_regs.lock); ret = ehea_clean_all_portres(port); if (ret) @@ -2599,7 +2587,6 @@ static int ehea_down(struct net_device *dev) dev->name, ret); ehea_update_firmware_handles(); - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); return ret; } @@ -3378,7 +3365,6 @@ static int __devinit ehea_probe_adapter(struct of_device *dev, ehea_error("Invalid ibmebus device probed"); return -EINVAL; } - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); adapter = kzalloc(sizeof(*adapter), GFP_KERNEL); if (!adapter) { @@ -3462,7 +3448,6 @@ out_free_ad: out: ehea_update_firmware_handles(); - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); return ret; } @@ -3481,8 +3466,6 @@ static int __devexit ehea_remove(struct of_device *dev) flush_scheduled_work(); - mutex_lock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); - ibmebus_free_irq(adapter->neq->attr.ist1, adapter); tasklet_kill(&adapter->neq_tasklet); @@ -3492,7 +3475,6 @@ static int __devexit ehea_remove(struct of_device *dev) kfree(adapter); ehea_update_firmware_handles(); - mutex_unlock(&ehea_fw_handles.lock); return 0; }
Looks like to me that the ehea_fw_handles.lock mutex and the ehea_bcmc_regs.lock spinlock are taken much longer than necessary and could as well be pushed inside the functions that need them (ehea_update_firmware_handles() and ehea_update_bcmc_registrations()) rather than at each callsite. Signed-off-by: Sebastien Dugue <sebastien.dugue@bull.net>