On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 01:54:00PM +0530, Oza Pawandeep wrote:
This patch protects pci_do_recovery with mutex.
pcie_do_recovery()
Please explain why the mutex is necessary. What bad things happen
without the mutex?
You named (some) of the other things "pcie"; maybe use "pcie" in the
mutex name as well so they look the same.
Signed-off-by: Oza Pawandeep <poza@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/pcie-err.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/pcie-err.c
index fcd5add..f830975 100644
--- a/drivers/pci/pcie/pcie-err.c
+++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/pcie-err.c
@@ -20,6 +20,8 @@
#include <linux/pcieport_if.h>
#include "portdrv.h"
+static DEFINE_MUTEX(pci_err_recovery_lock);
+
struct aer_broadcast_data {
enum pci_channel_state state;
enum pci_ers_result result;
@@ -283,6 +285,8 @@ void pcie_do_recovery(struct pci_dev *dev, int severity)
pci_ers_result_t status, result = PCI_ERS_RESULT_RECOVERED;
enum pci_channel_state state;
+ mutex_lock(&pci_err_recovery_lock);
+
if (severity == AER_FATAL)
state = pci_channel_io_frozen;
else
@@ -326,9 +330,11 @@ void pcie_do_recovery(struct pci_dev *dev, int severity)
report_resume);
dev_info(&dev->dev, "Device recovery successful\n");
+ mutex_unlock(&pci_err_recovery_lock);
return;
failed:
/* TODO: Should kernel panic here? */
dev_info(&dev->dev, "Device recovery failed\n");
+ mutex_unlock(&pci_err_recovery_lock);
}
--
Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc.,
a Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.