lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH net-next] BNX2: fix a Null Pointer for stats_blk
On 2015/9/24 6:31, David Miller wrote:
> From: Weidong Wang <wangweidong1@huawei.com>
> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 20:42:40 +0800
>
>> @@ -880,6 +882,7 @@ bnx2_alloc_mem(struct bnx2 *bp)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> + spin_lock(&bp->stats64_lock);
>> bp->stats_blk = status_blk + status_blk_size;
>>
>> bp->stats_blk_mapping = bp->status_blk_mapping + status_blk_size;
>> @@ -894,20 +897,23 @@ bnx2_alloc_mem(struct bnx2 *bp)
>> &bp->ctx_blk_mapping[i],
>> GFP_KERNEL);
>> if (bp->ctx_blk[i] == NULL)
>> - goto alloc_mem_err;
>> + goto free_stats64_lock;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> err = bnx2_alloc_rx_mem(bp);
>> if (err)
>> - goto alloc_mem_err;
>> + goto free_stats64_lock;
>
> You're holding a spinlock while doing GFP_KERNEL allocations.
>

hm, yep, I should move it after the allocations. Like this:

@@ -880,7 +882,9 @@ bnx2_alloc_mem(struct bnx2 *bp)
}
}

+ spin_lock(&bp->stats64_lock);
bp->stats_blk = status_blk + status_blk_size;
+ spin_unlock(&bp->stats64_lock);

the allocations won't use the stats_blk, so I shouldn't hold the
lock while doing allocations.

> Second of all, taking a spinlock in get_stats64() defeats the whole
> intention of making statistics acquisition as fast and as SMP scalable
> as possible.
>

It does affect the intention. Although, the problem exists then makes the
system panic within some case.

Do you have any idea about it?

Best Regards,
Weidong

> .
>




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-09-24 04:21    [W:1.429 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site