* mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
@ 2010-01-18 18:49 Andreas Mohr
2010-01-18 20:25 ` Julia Lawall
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Andreas Mohr @ 2010-01-18 18:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel; +Cc: Greg KH, Julia Lawall
Hi,
drivers/net/usb/mcs7830.c does several:
mutex_lock(&dev->phy_mutex);
/* write the MII command */
ret = mcs7830_set_reg(dev, HIF_REG_PHY_CMD1, 2, cmd);
if (ret < 0)
goto out;
/* wait for the data to become valid, should be within < 1ms */
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
ret = mcs7830_get_reg(dev, HIF_REG_PHY_CMD1, 2, cmd);
if ((ret < 0) || (cmd[1] &
HIF_REG_PHY_CMD2_READY_FLAG_BIT))
break;
ret = -EIO;
msleep(1);
}
Forgive me, but doesn't that mutex_lock()/msleep() (ab)use mean
risking a "scheduling while atomic"?
(such as discussed in e.g.
http://search.luky.org/linux-kernel.2004/msg92817.html )
And, if that is the case, shouldn't all such cases simply be killed for
good via a capable semantic patch?
Thanks,
Andreas Mohr
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
2010-01-18 18:49 mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger? Andreas Mohr
@ 2010-01-18 20:25 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-18 20:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-01-18 21:10 ` Julia Lawall
2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2010-01-18 20:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andreas Mohr; +Cc: linux-kernel, Greg KH
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> drivers/net/usb/mcs7830.c does several:
>
> mutex_lock(&dev->phy_mutex);
> /* write the MII command */
> ret = mcs7830_set_reg(dev, HIF_REG_PHY_CMD1, 2, cmd);
> if (ret < 0)
> goto out;
>
> /* wait for the data to become valid, should be within < 1ms */
> for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
> ret = mcs7830_get_reg(dev, HIF_REG_PHY_CMD1, 2, cmd);
> if ((ret < 0) || (cmd[1] &
> HIF_REG_PHY_CMD2_READY_FLAG_BIT))
> break;
> ret = -EIO;
> msleep(1);
> }
>
>
> Forgive me, but doesn't that mutex_lock()/msleep() (ab)use mean
> risking a "scheduling while atomic"?
> (such as discussed in e.g.
> http://search.luky.org/linux-kernel.2004/msg92817.html )
>
>
> And, if that is the case, shouldn't all such cases simply be killed for
> good via a capable semantic patch?
This could easily be done, if the diagnosis is correct.
julia
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
2010-01-18 18:49 mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger? Andreas Mohr
2010-01-18 20:25 ` Julia Lawall
@ 2010-01-18 20:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-01-18 21:10 ` Julia Lawall
2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2010-01-18 20:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andreas Mohr; +Cc: linux-kernel, Greg KH, Julia Lawall
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> drivers/net/usb/mcs7830.c does several:
>
> mutex_lock(&dev->phy_mutex);
> /* write the MII command */
> ret = mcs7830_set_reg(dev, HIF_REG_PHY_CMD1, 2, cmd);
> if (ret < 0)
> goto out;
>
> /* wait for the data to become valid, should be within < 1ms */
> for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
> ret = mcs7830_get_reg(dev, HIF_REG_PHY_CMD1, 2, cmd);
> if ((ret < 0) || (cmd[1] &
> HIF_REG_PHY_CMD2_READY_FLAG_BIT))
> break;
> ret = -EIO;
> msleep(1);
> }
>
>
> Forgive me, but doesn't that mutex_lock()/msleep() (ab)use mean
> risking a "scheduling while atomic"?
> (such as discussed in e.g.
> http://search.luky.org/linux-kernel.2004/msg92817.html )
No, that's different. You are allowed to sleep with a mutex held. The
thread is about spin_lock()/msleep().
spin_lock() is implicitly disabling preemption, mutex_lock() does not.
Thanks,
tglx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
2010-01-18 18:49 mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger? Andreas Mohr
2010-01-18 20:25 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-18 20:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2010-01-18 21:10 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-18 21:23 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-01-18 21:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
2 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2010-01-18 21:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andreas Mohr; +Cc: linux-kernel, Greg KH
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> Hi,
>
> drivers/net/usb/mcs7830.c does several:
>
> mutex_lock(&dev->phy_mutex);
> /* write the MII command */
> ret = mcs7830_set_reg(dev, HIF_REG_PHY_CMD1, 2, cmd);
> if (ret < 0)
> goto out;
>
> /* wait for the data to become valid, should be within < 1ms */
> for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
> ret = mcs7830_get_reg(dev, HIF_REG_PHY_CMD1, 2, cmd);
> if ((ret < 0) || (cmd[1] &
> HIF_REG_PHY_CMD2_READY_FLAG_BIT))
> break;
> ret = -EIO;
> msleep(1);
> }
>
>
> Forgive me, but doesn't that mutex_lock()/msleep() (ab)use mean
> risking a "scheduling while atomic"?
> (such as discussed in e.g.
> http://search.luky.org/linux-kernel.2004/msg92817.html )
>
>
> And, if that is the case, shouldn't all such cases simply be killed for
> good via a capable semantic patch?
The semantic match shown below finds 55 matches. All but two involve
mutex_lock. Those are in the file
/var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
in the functions ehci_bus_suspend and ehci_hub_control.
julia
@@
@@
(
*mutex_lock(...)
|
*spin_lock(...)
|
*spin_lock_irq(...)
|
*spin_lock_irqsave(...)
)
... when != mutex_unlock(...)
when != spin_unlock(...)
when != spin_unlock_irq(...)
when != spin_unlock_irqrestore(...)
*msleep(...)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
2010-01-18 21:10 ` Julia Lawall
@ 2010-01-18 21:23 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-01-18 21:35 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-19 2:53 ` mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger? Du, Alek
2010-01-18 21:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
1 sibling, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2010-01-18 21:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julia Lawall
Cc: Andreas Mohr, linux-kernel, Greg KH, Alek Du, Jacob Pan, Alan Stern
On Monday 18 January 2010, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> >
> > Forgive me, but doesn't that mutex_lock()/msleep() (ab)use mean
> > risking a "scheduling while atomic"?
> > (such as discussed in e.g.
> > http://search.luky.org/linux-kernel.2004/msg92817.html )
> >
> >
> > And, if that is the case, shouldn't all such cases simply be killed for
> > good via a capable semantic patch?
>
> The semantic match shown below finds 55 matches. All but two involve
> mutex_lock. Those are in the file
> /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
> in the functions ehci_bus_suspend and ehci_hub_control.
That code looks indeed broken as was added las July as part of 331ac6b288d9
"USB: EHCI: Add Intel Moorestown EHCI controller HOSTPCx extensions and
support phy low power mode". The reason that this hasn't triggered is
probably the lack of Moorestown machines in the field.
Arnd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
2010-01-18 21:10 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-18 21:23 ` Arnd Bergmann
@ 2010-01-18 21:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-01-18 21:32 ` Julia Lawall
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2010-01-18 21:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julia Lawall; +Cc: Andreas Mohr, linux-kernel, Greg KH
Julia,
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote:
>
> The semantic match shown below finds 55 matches. All but two involve
> mutex_lock. Those are in the file
As I said before the mutex_lock()/msleep() ones are fine.
> /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
> in the functions ehci_bus_suspend and ehci_hub_control.
The msleep in ehci_hub_control() which happens with ehci->lock held
and irqs disabled is definitely buggy.
I can't see anything wrong wth the msleep in ehci_bus_suspend() as it
is _before_ the spin_lock_irq(&ehci->lock) region.
Thanks,
tglx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
2010-01-18 21:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
@ 2010-01-18 21:32 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-18 21:38 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2010-01-18 21:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Gleixner; +Cc: Andreas Mohr, linux-kernel, Greg KH
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Julia,
>
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> >
> > The semantic match shown below finds 55 matches. All but two involve
> > mutex_lock. Those are in the file
>
> As I said before the mutex_lock()/msleep() ones are fine.
OK, I sem to have missed that message.
> > /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
> > in the functions ehci_bus_suspend and ehci_hub_control.
>
> The msleep in ehci_hub_control() which happens with ehci->lock held
> and irqs disabled is definitely buggy.
>
> I can't see anything wrong wth the msleep in ehci_bus_suspend() as it
> is _before_ the spin_lock_irq(&ehci->lock) region.
There is another one later in the function:
msleep(5);/* 5ms for HCD enter low pwr mode */
In my linux-next, it is on line 181.
julia
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
2010-01-18 21:23 ` Arnd Bergmann
@ 2010-01-18 21:35 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-18 22:25 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-01-19 2:53 ` mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger? Du, Alek
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2010-01-18 21:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann
Cc: Andreas Mohr, linux-kernel, Greg KH, Alek Du, Jacob Pan, Alan Stern
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 18 January 2010, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> > >
> > > Forgive me, but doesn't that mutex_lock()/msleep() (ab)use mean
> > > risking a "scheduling while atomic"?
> > > (such as discussed in e.g.
> > > http://search.luky.org/linux-kernel.2004/msg92817.html )
> > >
> > >
> > > And, if that is the case, shouldn't all such cases simply be killed for
> > > good via a capable semantic patch?
> >
> > The semantic match shown below finds 55 matches. All but two involve
> > mutex_lock. Those are in the file
> > /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
> > in the functions ehci_bus_suspend and ehci_hub_control.
>
> That code looks indeed broken as was added las July as part of 331ac6b288d9
> "USB: EHCI: Add Intel Moorestown EHCI controller HOSTPCx extensions and
> support phy low power mode". The reason that this hasn't triggered is
> probably the lack of Moorestown machines in the field.
The fix is just msleep -> mdelay?
julia
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
2010-01-18 21:32 ` Julia Lawall
@ 2010-01-18 21:38 ` Thomas Gleixner
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Gleixner @ 2010-01-18 21:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julia Lawall; +Cc: Andreas Mohr, linux-kernel, Greg KH
On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
> > Julia,
> >
> > On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> > >
> > > The semantic match shown below finds 55 matches. All but two involve
> > > mutex_lock. Those are in the file
> >
> > As I said before the mutex_lock()/msleep() ones are fine.
>
> OK, I sem to have missed that message.
>
> > > /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
> > > in the functions ehci_bus_suspend and ehci_hub_control.
> >
> > The msleep in ehci_hub_control() which happens with ehci->lock held
> > and irqs disabled is definitely buggy.
> >
> > I can't see anything wrong wth the msleep in ehci_bus_suspend() as it
> > is _before_ the spin_lock_irq(&ehci->lock) region.
>
> There is another one later in the function:
>
> msleep(5);/* 5ms for HCD enter low pwr mode */
>
> In my linux-next, it is on line 181.
Ooops, missed that one. Right, that's buggy as well.
Thanks,
tglx
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
2010-01-18 21:35 ` Julia Lawall
@ 2010-01-18 22:25 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-01-19 8:31 ` [PATCH] ehci: phy low power mode bug fixing alek du
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Arnd Bergmann @ 2010-01-18 22:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Julia Lawall
Cc: Andreas Mohr, linux-kernel, Greg KH, Alek Du, Jacob Pan, Alan Stern
On Monday 18 January 2010, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > That code looks indeed broken as was added las July as part of 331ac6b288d9
> > "USB: EHCI: Add Intel Moorestown EHCI controller HOSTPCx extensions and
> > support phy low power mode". The reason that this hasn't triggered is
> > probably the lack of Moorestown machines in the field.
>
> The fix is just msleep -> mdelay?
No, that would just kill the warning but still leave horrible code. There
should really be some way to move the sleeping operation outside of the
spinlock.
>From a brief look at the code, I think the sequence could be converted
from
lock();
suspend();
sleep();
clock_disable();
unlock();
to
lock();
again:
suspend();
unlock();
sleep();
lock();
if (!suspended())
goto again;
clock_disable();
unlock();
Arnd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
2010-01-18 21:23 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-01-18 21:35 ` Julia Lawall
@ 2010-01-19 2:53 ` Du, Alek
2010-01-19 6:25 ` Julia Lawall
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Du, Alek @ 2010-01-19 2:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann, Julia Lawall
Cc: Andreas Mohr, linux-kernel, Greg KH, Pan, Jacob jun, Alan Stern
I confirm that thing is bad, I need to prepare another patch to fix that.
Thanks,
Alek
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@arndb.de]
>Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 5:24 AM
>To: Julia Lawall
>Cc: Andreas Mohr; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Greg KH; Du, Alek; Pan, Jacob
>jun; Alan Stern
>Subject: Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
>
>On Monday 18 January 2010, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote:
>> >
>> > Forgive me, but doesn't that mutex_lock()/msleep() (ab)use mean
>> > risking a "scheduling while atomic"?
>> > (such as discussed in e.g.
>> > http://search.luky.org/linux-kernel.2004/msg92817.html )
>> >
>> >
>> > And, if that is the case, shouldn't all such cases simply be killed for
>> > good via a capable semantic patch?
>>
>> The semantic match shown below finds 55 matches. All but two involve
>> mutex_lock. Those are in the file
>> /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
>> in the functions ehci_bus_suspend and ehci_hub_control.
>
>That code looks indeed broken as was added las July as part of 331ac6b288d9
>"USB: EHCI: Add Intel Moorestown EHCI controller HOSTPCx extensions and
>support phy low power mode". The reason that this hasn't triggered is
>probably the lack of Moorestown machines in the field.
>
> Arnd
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
2010-01-19 2:53 ` mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger? Du, Alek
@ 2010-01-19 6:25 ` Julia Lawall
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Julia Lawall @ 2010-01-19 6:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Du, Alek
Cc: Arnd Bergmann, Andreas Mohr, linux-kernel, Greg KH, Pan,
Jacob jun, Alan Stern
So you will fix /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c?
I think it is a bit out of my expertise...
julia
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010, Du, Alek wrote:
> I confirm that thing is bad, I need to prepare another patch to fix that.
>
> Thanks,
> Alek
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@arndb.de]
> >Sent: Tuesday, January 19, 2010 5:24 AM
> >To: Julia Lawall
> >Cc: Andreas Mohr; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Greg KH; Du, Alek; Pan, Jacob
> >jun; Alan Stern
> >Subject: Re: mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger?
> >
> >On Monday 18 January 2010, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >> On Mon, 18 Jan 2010, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Forgive me, but doesn't that mutex_lock()/msleep() (ab)use mean
> >> > risking a "scheduling while atomic"?
> >> > (such as discussed in e.g.
> >> > http://search.luky.org/linux-kernel.2004/msg92817.html )
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > And, if that is the case, shouldn't all such cases simply be killed for
> >> > good via a capable semantic patch?
> >>
> >> The semantic match shown below finds 55 matches. All but two involve
> >> mutex_lock. Those are in the file
> >> /var/linuxes/linux-next/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
> >> in the functions ehci_bus_suspend and ehci_hub_control.
> >
> >That code looks indeed broken as was added las July as part of 331ac6b288d9
> >"USB: EHCI: Add Intel Moorestown EHCI controller HOSTPCx extensions and
> >support phy low power mode". The reason that this hasn't triggered is
> >probably the lack of Moorestown machines in the field.
> >
> > Arnd
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] ehci: phy low power mode bug fixing
2010-01-18 22:25 ` Arnd Bergmann
@ 2010-01-19 8:31 ` alek du
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: alek du @ 2010-01-19 8:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Arnd Bergmann, Greg KH
Cc: Julia Lawall, Andreas Mohr, linux-kernel, Pan, Jacob jun, Alan Stern
This patch should fix the bug and I tested it with Moorestown platform...
But the strange thing is that even the original code does not trigger the
"scheduling while atomic" issue...
>From ca7833d854867e91d6aa6bccf1f3224862b3a25c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Alek Du <alek.du@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2010 16:05:15 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] ehci: phy low power mode bug fixing
1. There are two msleep calls inside two spin lock sections, need to unlock
and lock again after msleep.
2. Save a extra status reg setting.
Signed-off-by: Alek Du <alek.du@intel.com>
---
drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c | 13 ++++++++-----
1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
index 2c6571c..7d77fbb 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-hub.c
@@ -178,7 +178,9 @@ static int ehci_bus_suspend (struct usb_hcd *hcd)
if (hostpc_reg) {
u32 t3;
+ spin_unlock_irq(&ehci->lock);
msleep(5);/* 5ms for HCD enter low pwr mode */
+ spin_lock_irq(&ehci->lock);
t3 = ehci_readl(ehci, hostpc_reg);
ehci_writel(ehci, t3 | HOSTPC_PHCD, hostpc_reg);
t3 = ehci_readl(ehci, hostpc_reg);
@@ -886,17 +888,18 @@ static int ehci_hub_control (
if ((temp & PORT_PE) == 0
|| (temp & PORT_RESET) != 0)
goto error;
- ehci_writel(ehci, temp | PORT_SUSPEND, status_reg);
+
/* After above check the port must be connected.
* Set appropriate bit thus could put phy into low power
* mode if we have hostpc feature
*/
+ temp &= ~PORT_WKCONN_E;
+ temp |= PORT_WKDISC_E | PORT_WKOC_E;
+ ehci_writel(ehci, temp | PORT_SUSPEND, status_reg);
if (hostpc_reg) {
- temp &= ~PORT_WKCONN_E;
- temp |= (PORT_WKDISC_E | PORT_WKOC_E);
- ehci_writel(ehci, temp | PORT_SUSPEND,
- status_reg);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ehci->lock, flags);
msleep(5);/* 5ms for HCD enter low pwr mode */
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&ehci->lock, flags);
temp1 = ehci_readl(ehci, hostpc_reg);
ehci_writel(ehci, temp1 | HOSTPC_PHCD,
hostpc_reg);
--
1.6.3.3
On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 06:25:10 +0800
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Monday 18 January 2010, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > That code looks indeed broken as was added las July as part of
> > > 331ac6b288d9 "USB: EHCI: Add Intel Moorestown EHCI controller
> > > HOSTPCx extensions and support phy low power mode". The reason
> > > that this hasn't triggered is probably the lack of Moorestown
> > > machines in the field.
> >
> > The fix is just msleep -> mdelay?
>
> No, that would just kill the warning but still leave horrible code.
> There should really be some way to move the sleeping operation
> outside of the spinlock.
>
> From a brief look at the code, I think the sequence could be converted
> from
>
> lock();
> suspend();
> sleep();
> clock_disable();
> unlock();
>
> to
>
> lock();
> again:
> suspend();
> unlock();
> sleep();
> lock();
> if (!suspended())
> goto again;
> clock_disable();
> unlock();
>
> Arnd
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2010-01-19 8:34 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2010-01-18 18:49 mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger? Andreas Mohr
2010-01-18 20:25 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-18 20:47 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-01-18 21:10 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-18 21:23 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-01-18 21:35 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-18 22:25 ` Arnd Bergmann
2010-01-19 8:31 ` [PATCH] ehci: phy low power mode bug fixing alek du
2010-01-19 2:53 ` mcs7830 usb net: "scheduling while atomic" danger? Du, Alek
2010-01-19 6:25 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-18 21:24 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-01-18 21:32 ` Julia Lawall
2010-01-18 21:38 ` Thomas Gleixner
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).