From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>
To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>,
linux-kernel-dev@beckhoff.com,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
oss-drivers@netronome.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] firmware: Correct handling of fw_state_wait_timeout() return value
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2017 08:30:37 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJpBn1wkUzNxQGy+d1Lq_7UCsgjvM65E+=cNZcP7NBSMyS157g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAB=NE6Xj0TpwMVTDWtEaYAqSn8HdVapXqUf7j4a+i2f+zdkSZA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 8:21 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> retval = fw_state_wait_timeout(&buf->fw_st, timeout);
>>> - if (retval < 0) {
>>> + if (retval == -ETIMEDOUT || retval == -ERESTARTSYS) {
>>> mutex_lock(&fw_lock);
>>> fw_load_abort(fw_priv);
>>> mutex_unlock(&fw_lock);
>>
>> This is a bit messy, two other similar issues were reported before
>> and upon review I suggested Patrick Bruenn's fix with a better commit
>> log seems best fit. Patrick sent a patch Jan 4, 2017 but never followed up
>> despite my feedback on a small change on the commit log message [0]. Can you
>> try that and if that fixes it can you adjust the commit log accordingly? Please
>> note the preferred solution would be:
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
>> index b9ac348e8d33..c530f8b4af01 100644
>> --- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
>> +++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
>> @@ -542,6 +542,8 @@ static struct firmware_priv *to_firmware_priv(struct device *dev)
>>
>> static void __fw_load_abort(struct firmware_buf *buf)
>> {
>> + if (!buf)
>> + return;
Allow me to try to persuade you one last time :) My patch makes the
code more logical and easier to follow. The code says:
in case no wake up happened - finish the wait (otherwise the waking
thread finishes it). Adding a NULL-check would just paper over the
issue and can cause trouble down the line. If fw_state_wait_timeout()
returned because someone woke it up - there is no reason to abort the
wait. The wait is already finished. The buggy commit mixed up return
codes from fw_state_wait_timeout() - mixed "nobody woke us up" with
"we couldn't find the FW", that's why we need to check for specific
error codes.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-17 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-01-17 15:35 [PATCHv2] firmware: Correct handling of fw_state_wait_timeout() return value Jakub Kicinski
2017-01-17 16:15 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-17 16:21 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-17 16:30 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2017-01-17 17:30 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-17 18:04 ` Jakub Kicinski
2017-01-17 20:53 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-17 21:17 ` Jakub Kicinski
2017-01-18 6:33 ` linux-kernel-dev
2017-01-18 20:01 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-23 16:11 ` [PATCH 0/7] firmware: expand test units for fallback mechanism Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-23 16:11 ` [PATCH 1/7] test_firmware: move misc_device down Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-23 16:11 ` [PATCH 2/7] test_firmware: use device attribute groups Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-23 16:11 ` [PATCH 3/7] tools: firmware: check for distro fallback udev cancel rule Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-23 16:11 ` [PATCH 4/7] tools: firmware: rename fallback mechanism script Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-23 16:11 ` [PATCH 5/7] tools: firmware: add fallback cancelation testing Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-23 16:11 ` [PATCH 6/7] test_firmware: add test custom fallback trigger Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-23 16:11 ` [PATCH 7/7] firmware: firmware: fix NULL pointer dereference in __fw_load_abort() Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-25 10:52 ` Greg KH
2017-01-25 13:36 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-25 13:42 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-25 14:41 ` Greg KH
2017-01-25 15:21 ` [PATCH v2] " Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-25 15:47 ` Greg KH
2017-01-25 18:31 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2017-01-25 18:31 ` [PATCH v3] " Luis R. Rodriguez
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='CAJpBn1wkUzNxQGy+d1Lq_7UCsgjvM65E+=cNZcP7NBSMyS157g@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jakub.kicinski@netronome.com \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=chris@chris-wilson.co.uk \
--cc=daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-dev@beckhoff.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
--cc=oss-drivers@netronome.com \
/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).