Re: Problem: Possible deadlock for 2.4 SMP systems

[Paul Fulghum]

Gerard Snitselaar wrote:
> What appears to happen is cpu0 calls cli() in
> shutdown() (drivers/char/serial.c), grabbing global_irq_lock.
> Meanwhile cpu1 sets IRQ_INPROGRESS, and eventually calls
> handle_IRQ_event() and spins on global_irq_lock in irq_enter().
> CPU0 calls free_irq() and eventually gets to the point where
> it spins while IRQ_INPROGRESS is set. Since cpu0 is holding
> global_irq_lock, cpu1 can't do its work and clear IRQ_INPROGRESS.

From looking at irq.c (2.4.31) I guess that calling free_irq()
on SMP after cli() is not safe because of the race you describe.

> I read somewhere that global_irq_lock is deprecated, so is there
> something that the serial driver should be doing instead of cli()
> and restore_flags() in shutdown()?

shutdown() seems a little backwards:
it calls free_irq(), then it disables device interrupts.

One way of handling this may be to move the code
block (the if statement after 'Free the IRQ' comment)
that calls free_irq() to after the restore_flags().

At that point, the device is no longer generating
interrupts and has been removed from the IRQ_ports
list so the ISR will not touch the device instance
and free_irq() can finish safely.

--
Paul Fulghum
Microgate Systems, Ltd.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/