On 07/08/2015 09:17 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Ming Lei <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Linus Torvalds >> <[email protected]> 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? > > Something like the attached, perhaps? > > Shuah, how reproducible is this? Does this (completely untested) patch > make any difference? >
Happened both times I booted 4.2-rc1 up, so I would say 100% so far. I will test with your patch and report results. -- Shuah -- Shuah Khan Sr. Linux Kernel Developer Open Source Innovation Group Samsung Research America (Silicon Valley) [email protected] | (970) 217-8978 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
