[patch 083/164] ARM: 6146/1: sa1111: Prevent deadlock in resume path

[Greg KH]

2.6.33-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: =?UTF-8?q?Marek=20Va=C5=A1ut?= <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxx>

commit 3defb2476166445982a90c12d33f8947e75476c4 upstream.

This patch reorganises the sa1111_resume() function in a manner the spinlock
happens after calling the sa1111_wake(). This fixes two bugs:

1) This function called sa1111_wake() which tried to claim the same spinlock
   the sa1111_resume() already claimed. This would result in certain deadlock.

   Original idea for this part: Russell King <rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

2) The function didn't unlock the spinlock in case the chip didn't report
   correct ID.

   Original idea for this part: Julia Lawall <julia@xxxxxxx>

Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxx>

---
 arch/arm/common/sa1111.c |    9 +++++++--
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--- a/arch/arm/common/sa1111.c
+++ b/arch/arm/common/sa1111.c
@@ -887,8 +887,6 @@ static int sa1111_resume(struct platform
 	if (!save)
 		return 0;
 
-	spin_lock_irqsave(&sachip->lock, flags);
-
 	/*
 	 * Ensure that the SA1111 is still here.
 	 * FIXME: shouldn't do this here.
@@ -905,6 +903,13 @@ static int sa1111_resume(struct platform
 	 * First of all, wake up the chip.
 	 */
 	sa1111_wake(sachip);
+
+	/*
+	 * Only lock for write ops. Also, sa1111_wake must be called with
+	 * released spinlock!
+	 */
+	spin_lock_irqsave(&sachip->lock, flags);
+
 	sa1111_writel(0, sachip->base + SA1111_INTC + SA1111_INTEN0);
 	sa1111_writel(0, sachip->base + SA1111_INTC + SA1111_INTEN1);
 


--
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/