lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jul]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: Linux 4.2-rc1
From
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 1:29 AM, Linus Torvalds
>> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> 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?

When the request is aborted, the firmware device will be removed,
so it is OK to skip the two fields.

>
> Something like the attached, perhaps?

Looks it is fine.

>
> Shuah, how reproducible is this? Does this (completely untested) patch
> make any difference?
>
> Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-07-09 07:21    [W:0.114 / U:0.160 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site