On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 1:15 PM Dan Williams <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 12:58 PM Alexander Duyck > <[email protected]> wrote: [..] > > Also the context for the two functions seems to be a bit different. In > > the case of __device_attach_driver the device_lock is already held. In > > __driver_attach the lock on the device isn't taken until after a match > > has been found. > > Yes, I was only pattern matching when looking at the context of where > dev->dead is checked in __driver_attach() and wondering why it was > checked outside of __device_attach_driver()
...and now I realize the bigger point of your concern, we need to check dev->dead after acquiring the device_lock otherwise the race is back. We can defer that consolidation, but the larger concern of making it internal to __device_attach_driver() still stands.
