Re: [PATCH] netxen: Fix a sleep-in-atomic bug in netxen_nic_pci_mem_access_direct
From: Kalle Valo
Date: Wed Jun 21 2017 - 02:12:01 EST
David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> From: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@xxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 10:48:53 +0800
>> The driver may sleep under a spin lock, and the function call path is:
>> netxen_nic_pci_mem_access_direct (acquire the lock by spin_lock)
>> ioremap --> may sleep
>> To fix it, the lock is released before "ioremap", and the lock is
>> acquired again after this function.
>> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@xxxxxxx>
> This style of change you are making is really starting to be a
> You can't just drop locks like this, especially without explaining
> why it's ok, and why the mutual exclusion this code was trying to
> achieve is still going to be OK afterwards.
> In fact, I see zero analysis of the locking situation here, why
> it was needed in the first place, and why your change is OK in
> that context.
> Any locking change is delicate, and you must put the greatest of
> care and consideration into it.
> Just putting "unlock/lock" around the sleeping operation shows a
> very low level of consideration for the implications of the change
> you are making.
> This isn't like making whitespace fixes, sorry...
We already tried to explain this to Jia-Ju during review of a wireless
Jia-Ju, you should listen to feedback. If you continue submitting random
patches like this makes it hard for maintainers to trust your patches