Re: [BUG] IB/hfi1: might sleep under spinlock in hfi1_ioctl()

[ira.weiny]

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 07:58:18PM -0400, ira. weiny wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 12:32:29AM +0300, Alexey Khoroshilov wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > hfi1_ioctl() contains many calls to might sleep functions with
> > dd->hfi1_snoop.snoop_lock spinlock held (for example, access_ok,
> > copy_from_user, kzalloc(GFP_KERNEL), etc.).
> > 
> > Should dd->hfi1_snoop.snoop_lock be acquired just before updating state?
> 
> I believe you are correct.
> 
> I am currently in the process of pushing fixes to the staging tree.
> 
> We have a patch which fixes this queued up but it depends on at least one other
> patch in my queue.
> 
> I will do my best to get this submitted soon.

I have just posted a series which addresses this problem as well as doing
general clean up on hfi1_ioctl.  The specific fix is contained in this patch.

[PATCH 7/8] staging/rdma/hfi1: Reduce snoop locking scope in IOCTL handler.

Thanks for the report,
Ira

--
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/