lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jun]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC] PCI device list locking
    * Greg KH (greg@kroah.com) wrote:
    >
    > Comments? Places I missed protecting?

    Is it safe to ignore pcibios_init? This happens after smp_init, but are
    could there be multiple events (that would effect pcibios_sort)?

    > --- a/drivers/pci/proc.c Tue Jun 17 12:47:27 2003
    > +++ b/drivers/pci/proc.c Tue Jun 17 12:47:27 2003
    > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
    > #include <linux/proc_fs.h>
    > #include <linux/seq_file.h>
    > #include <linux/smp_lock.h>
    > +#include "pci.h"
    >
    > #include <asm/uaccess.h>
    > #include <asm/byteorder.h>
    > @@ -311,20 +312,32 @@
    > struct list_head *p = &pci_devices;
    > loff_t n = *pos;
    >
    > - /* XXX: surely we need some locking for traversing the list? */
    > + spin_lock(&pci_bus_lock);

    should you just grab this lock here (pci_seq_start), and release in
    pci_seq_stop, holding for duration of ->seq_start() ->seq_next()
    ->seq_stop(). IOW, what happens when you grab list element in
    ->seq_start(), it's removed from list, you reference a bogus ->next
    pointer in ->seq_next()?

    thanks,
    -chris
    --
    Linux Security Modules http://lsm.immunix.org http://lsm.bkbits.net
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:36    [W:0.047 / U:90.876 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site