Re: [PATCH 16/16] hold bus_mutex in netlink and search
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 03:10:57PM -0600, David Fries wrote: > That's 1 through 14, and 16. Patch 15 was in my tree from another developer, > "drivers/w1/masters/w1-gpio.c: add strong pullup emulation" > and wasn't included in what I submitted. Should I repost the series > in sequence? Please resend what hasn't been taken. It will have to wait for after 3.14-rc1 as my trees are closed at the moment until that comes out. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 16/16] hold bus_mutex in netlink and search
That's 1 through 14, and 16. Patch 15 was in my tree from another developer, "drivers/w1/masters/w1-gpio.c: add strong pullup emulation" and wasn't included in what I submitted. Should I repost the series in sequence? On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:58:02AM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > Hi > > 15.01.2014, 08:52, "David Fries" : > > The bus_mutex needs to be taken to serialize access to a specific bus. > > netlink wasn't updated when bus_mutex was added and was calling > > without that lock held, and not all of the masters were holding the > > bus_mutex in a search. This was causing the ds2490 hardware to stop > > responding when both netlink and /sys slaves were executing bus > > commands at the same time. > > > > Signed-off-by: David Fries > > Looks good to me, thank you. > Greg, please pull the whole set if you hadn't yet > > Acked-by: Evgeniy Polyakov -- David Fries PGP pub CB1EE8F0 http://fries.net/~david/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 16/16] hold bus_mutex in netlink and search
Hi 15.01.2014, 08:52, "David Fries" : > The bus_mutex needs to be taken to serialize access to a specific bus. > netlink wasn't updated when bus_mutex was added and was calling > without that lock held, and not all of the masters were holding the > bus_mutex in a search. This was causing the ds2490 hardware to stop > responding when both netlink and /sys slaves were executing bus > commands at the same time. > > Signed-off-by: David Fries Looks good to me, thank you. Greg, please pull the whole set if you hadn't yet Acked-by: Evgeniy Polyakov -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 16/16] hold bus_mutex in netlink and search
Hi 15.01.2014, 08:52, David Fries da...@fries.net: The bus_mutex needs to be taken to serialize access to a specific bus. netlink wasn't updated when bus_mutex was added and was calling without that lock held, and not all of the masters were holding the bus_mutex in a search. This was causing the ds2490 hardware to stop responding when both netlink and /sys slaves were executing bus commands at the same time. Signed-off-by: David Fries da...@fries.net Looks good to me, thank you. Greg, please pull the whole set if you hadn't yet Acked-by: Evgeniy Polyakov z...@ioremap.net -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 16/16] hold bus_mutex in netlink and search
That's 1 through 14, and 16. Patch 15 was in my tree from another developer, drivers/w1/masters/w1-gpio.c: add strong pullup emulation and wasn't included in what I submitted. Should I repost the series in sequence? On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 12:58:02AM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: Hi 15.01.2014, 08:52, David Fries da...@fries.net: The bus_mutex needs to be taken to serialize access to a specific bus. netlink wasn't updated when bus_mutex was added and was calling without that lock held, and not all of the masters were holding the bus_mutex in a search. This was causing the ds2490 hardware to stop responding when both netlink and /sys slaves were executing bus commands at the same time. Signed-off-by: David Fries da...@fries.net Looks good to me, thank you. Greg, please pull the whole set if you hadn't yet Acked-by: Evgeniy Polyakov z...@ioremap.net -- David Fries da...@fries.netPGP pub CB1EE8F0 http://fries.net/~david/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [PATCH 16/16] hold bus_mutex in netlink and search
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 03:10:57PM -0600, David Fries wrote: That's 1 through 14, and 16. Patch 15 was in my tree from another developer, drivers/w1/masters/w1-gpio.c: add strong pullup emulation and wasn't included in what I submitted. Should I repost the series in sequence? Please resend what hasn't been taken. It will have to wait for after 3.14-rc1 as my trees are closed at the moment until that comes out. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[PATCH 16/16] hold bus_mutex in netlink and search
The bus_mutex needs to be taken to serialize access to a specific bus.
netlink wasn't updated when bus_mutex was added and was calling
without that lock held, and not all of the masters were holding the
bus_mutex in a search. This was causing the ds2490 hardware to stop
responding when both netlink and /sys slaves were executing bus
commands at the same time.
Signed-off-by: David Fries
---
This fixes existing bugs, tacking it to the end of the previous patch
series.
drivers/w1/masters/ds1wm.c |4 +++-
drivers/w1/masters/ds2490.c |8 ++--
drivers/w1/w1_netlink.c | 13 +++--
3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/w1/masters/ds1wm.c b/drivers/w1/masters/ds1wm.c
index 02df3b1..b077b8b 100644
--- a/drivers/w1/masters/ds1wm.c
+++ b/drivers/w1/masters/ds1wm.c
@@ -326,13 +326,14 @@ static void ds1wm_search(void *data, struct w1_master
*master_dev,
unsigned slaves_found = 0;
unsigned int pass = 0;
+ mutex_lock(_dev->bus_mutex);
dev_dbg(_data->pdev->dev, "search begin\n");
while (true) {
++pass;
if (pass > 100) {
dev_dbg(_data->pdev->dev,
"too many attempts (100), search aborted\n");
- return;
+ break;
}
mutex_lock(_dev->bus_mutex);
@@ -439,6 +440,7 @@ static void ds1wm_search(void *data, struct w1_master
*master_dev,
dev_dbg(_data->pdev->dev,
"pass: %d total: %d search done ms d bit pos: %d\n", pass,
slaves_found, ms_discrep_bit);
+ mutex_unlock(_dev->bus_mutex);
}
/* - */
diff --git a/drivers/w1/masters/ds2490.c b/drivers/w1/masters/ds2490.c
index db0bf32..7404ad30 100644
--- a/drivers/w1/masters/ds2490.c
+++ b/drivers/w1/masters/ds2490.c
@@ -727,9 +727,11 @@ static void ds9490r_search(void *data, struct w1_master
*master,
*/
u64 buf[2*64/8];
+ mutex_lock(>bus_mutex);
+
/* address to start searching at */
if (ds_send_data(dev, (u8 *)>search_id, 8) < 0)
- return;
+ goto search_out;
master->search_id = 0;
value = COMM_SEARCH_ACCESS | COMM_IM | COMM_RST | COMM_SM | COMM_F |
@@ -739,7 +741,7 @@ static void ds9490r_search(void *data, struct w1_master
*master,
search_limit = 0;
index = search_type | (search_limit << 8);
if (ds_send_control(dev, value, index) < 0)
- return;
+ goto search_out;
do {
schedule_timeout(jtime);
@@ -791,6 +793,8 @@ static void ds9490r_search(void *data, struct w1_master
*master,
master->max_slave_count);
set_bit(W1_WARN_MAX_COUNT, >flags);
}
+search_out:
+ mutex_unlock(>bus_mutex);
}
#if 0
diff --git a/drivers/w1/w1_netlink.c b/drivers/w1/w1_netlink.c
index a5dc219..5234964 100644
--- a/drivers/w1/w1_netlink.c
+++ b/drivers/w1/w1_netlink.c
@@ -246,11 +246,16 @@ static int w1_process_command_master(struct w1_master
*dev,
{
int err = -EINVAL;
+ /* drop bus_mutex for search (does it's own locking), and add/remove
+* which doesn't use the bus
+*/
switch (req_cmd->cmd) {
case W1_CMD_SEARCH:
case W1_CMD_ALARM_SEARCH:
case W1_CMD_LIST_SLAVES:
+ mutex_unlock(>bus_mutex);
err = w1_get_slaves(dev, req_msg, req_hdr, req_cmd);
+ mutex_lock(>bus_mutex);
break;
case W1_CMD_READ:
case W1_CMD_WRITE:
@@ -262,8 +267,12 @@ static int w1_process_command_master(struct w1_master *dev,
break;
case W1_CMD_SLAVE_ADD:
case W1_CMD_SLAVE_REMOVE:
+ mutex_unlock(>bus_mutex);
+ mutex_lock(>mutex);
err = w1_process_command_addremove(dev, req_msg, req_hdr,
req_cmd);
+ mutex_unlock(>mutex);
+ mutex_lock(>bus_mutex);
break;
default:
err = -EINVAL;
@@ -400,7 +409,7 @@ static void w1_process_cb(struct w1_master *dev, struct
w1_async_cmd *async_cmd)
struct w1_slave *sl = node->sl;
struct w1_netlink_cmd *cmd = NULL;
- mutex_lock(>mutex);
+ mutex_lock(>bus_mutex);
dev->portid = node->block->portid;
if (sl && w1_reset_select_slave(sl))
err = -ENODEV;
@@ -437,7 +446,7 @@ static void w1_process_cb(struct w1_master *dev, struct
w1_async_cmd *async_cmd)
else
atomic_dec(>refcnt);
dev->portid = 0;
- mutex_unlock(>mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(>bus_mutex);
mutex_lock(>list_mutex);
list_del(_cmd->async_entry);
--
1.7.10.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body
[PATCH 16/16] hold bus_mutex in netlink and search
The bus_mutex needs to be taken to serialize access to a specific bus.
netlink wasn't updated when bus_mutex was added and was calling
without that lock held, and not all of the masters were holding the
bus_mutex in a search. This was causing the ds2490 hardware to stop
responding when both netlink and /sys slaves were executing bus
commands at the same time.
Signed-off-by: David Fries da...@fries.net
---
This fixes existing bugs, tacking it to the end of the previous patch
series.
drivers/w1/masters/ds1wm.c |4 +++-
drivers/w1/masters/ds2490.c |8 ++--
drivers/w1/w1_netlink.c | 13 +++--
3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/w1/masters/ds1wm.c b/drivers/w1/masters/ds1wm.c
index 02df3b1..b077b8b 100644
--- a/drivers/w1/masters/ds1wm.c
+++ b/drivers/w1/masters/ds1wm.c
@@ -326,13 +326,14 @@ static void ds1wm_search(void *data, struct w1_master
*master_dev,
unsigned slaves_found = 0;
unsigned int pass = 0;
+ mutex_lock(master_dev-bus_mutex);
dev_dbg(ds1wm_data-pdev-dev, search begin\n);
while (true) {
++pass;
if (pass 100) {
dev_dbg(ds1wm_data-pdev-dev,
too many attempts (100), search aborted\n);
- return;
+ break;
}
mutex_lock(master_dev-bus_mutex);
@@ -439,6 +440,7 @@ static void ds1wm_search(void *data, struct w1_master
*master_dev,
dev_dbg(ds1wm_data-pdev-dev,
pass: %d total: %d search done ms d bit pos: %d\n, pass,
slaves_found, ms_discrep_bit);
+ mutex_unlock(master_dev-bus_mutex);
}
/* - */
diff --git a/drivers/w1/masters/ds2490.c b/drivers/w1/masters/ds2490.c
index db0bf32..7404ad30 100644
--- a/drivers/w1/masters/ds2490.c
+++ b/drivers/w1/masters/ds2490.c
@@ -727,9 +727,11 @@ static void ds9490r_search(void *data, struct w1_master
*master,
*/
u64 buf[2*64/8];
+ mutex_lock(master-bus_mutex);
+
/* address to start searching at */
if (ds_send_data(dev, (u8 *)master-search_id, 8) 0)
- return;
+ goto search_out;
master-search_id = 0;
value = COMM_SEARCH_ACCESS | COMM_IM | COMM_RST | COMM_SM | COMM_F |
@@ -739,7 +741,7 @@ static void ds9490r_search(void *data, struct w1_master
*master,
search_limit = 0;
index = search_type | (search_limit 8);
if (ds_send_control(dev, value, index) 0)
- return;
+ goto search_out;
do {
schedule_timeout(jtime);
@@ -791,6 +793,8 @@ static void ds9490r_search(void *data, struct w1_master
*master,
master-max_slave_count);
set_bit(W1_WARN_MAX_COUNT, master-flags);
}
+search_out:
+ mutex_unlock(master-bus_mutex);
}
#if 0
diff --git a/drivers/w1/w1_netlink.c b/drivers/w1/w1_netlink.c
index a5dc219..5234964 100644
--- a/drivers/w1/w1_netlink.c
+++ b/drivers/w1/w1_netlink.c
@@ -246,11 +246,16 @@ static int w1_process_command_master(struct w1_master
*dev,
{
int err = -EINVAL;
+ /* drop bus_mutex for search (does it's own locking), and add/remove
+* which doesn't use the bus
+*/
switch (req_cmd-cmd) {
case W1_CMD_SEARCH:
case W1_CMD_ALARM_SEARCH:
case W1_CMD_LIST_SLAVES:
+ mutex_unlock(dev-bus_mutex);
err = w1_get_slaves(dev, req_msg, req_hdr, req_cmd);
+ mutex_lock(dev-bus_mutex);
break;
case W1_CMD_READ:
case W1_CMD_WRITE:
@@ -262,8 +267,12 @@ static int w1_process_command_master(struct w1_master *dev,
break;
case W1_CMD_SLAVE_ADD:
case W1_CMD_SLAVE_REMOVE:
+ mutex_unlock(dev-bus_mutex);
+ mutex_lock(dev-mutex);
err = w1_process_command_addremove(dev, req_msg, req_hdr,
req_cmd);
+ mutex_unlock(dev-mutex);
+ mutex_lock(dev-bus_mutex);
break;
default:
err = -EINVAL;
@@ -400,7 +409,7 @@ static void w1_process_cb(struct w1_master *dev, struct
w1_async_cmd *async_cmd)
struct w1_slave *sl = node-sl;
struct w1_netlink_cmd *cmd = NULL;
- mutex_lock(dev-mutex);
+ mutex_lock(dev-bus_mutex);
dev-portid = node-block-portid;
if (sl w1_reset_select_slave(sl))
err = -ENODEV;
@@ -437,7 +446,7 @@ static void w1_process_cb(struct w1_master *dev, struct
w1_async_cmd *async_cmd)
else
atomic_dec(dev-refcnt);
dev-portid = 0;
- mutex_unlock(dev-mutex);
+ mutex_unlock(dev-bus_mutex);
mutex_lock(dev-list_mutex);
list_del(async_cmd-async_entry);
--
1.7.10.4
--
