Re: Linux 4.2-rc1

[Ming Lei]

On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Linus Torvalds
>> <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Also, it looks like you need to hold the "fw_lock" to even look at
>>> that pointer, since the buffer can get reallocated etc.
>>
>> Yes, the above code with holding 'fw_lock' is right fix for the issue since
>> sysfs read can happen anytime, and there is one race between firmware
>> request abort and reading uevent of sysfs.
>
> So if fw_priv->buf is NULL, what should we do?
>
> Should we skip the TIMEOUT= and ASYNC= fields too?

When the request is aborted, the firmware device will be removed,
so it is OK to skip the two fields.

>
> Something like the attached, perhaps?

Looks it is fine.

>
> Shuah, how reproducible is this? Does this (completely untested) patch
> make any difference?
>
>                   Linus
--
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/