On Tuesday, November 7, 2017 11:47:54 PM CET Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 10:08 PM, Ville Syrjala
> <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > acpi_remove_pm_notifier() ends up calling flush_workqueue() while
> > holding acpi_pm_notifier_lock, and that same lock is taken by
> > by the work via acpi_pm_notify_handler(). This can deadlock.
>
> OK, good catch!
>
> [cut]
>
> >
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Len Brown <lenb@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Fixes: c072530f391e ("ACPI / PM: Revork the handling of ACPI device wakeup notifications")
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/acpi/device_pm.c | 21 ++++++++++++---------
> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> > index fbcc73f7a099..18af71057b44 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
> > @@ -387,6 +387,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(acpi_bus_power_manageable);
> >
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PM
> > static DEFINE_MUTEX(acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
> > +static DEFINE_MUTEX(acpi_pm_notifier_install_lock);
> >
> > void acpi_pm_wakeup_event(struct device *dev)
> > {
> > @@ -443,24 +444,25 @@ acpi_status acpi_add_pm_notifier(struct acpi_device *adev, struct device *dev,
> > if (!dev && !func)
> > return AE_BAD_PARAMETER;
> >
> > - mutex_lock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
> > + mutex_lock(&acpi_pm_notifier_install_lock);
> >
> > if (adev->wakeup.flags.notifier_present)
> > goto out;
> >
> > - adev->wakeup.ws = wakeup_source_register(dev_name(&adev->dev));
> > - adev->wakeup.context.dev = dev;
> > - adev->wakeup.context.func = func;
> > -
>
> But this doesn't look good to me.
>
> notifier_present should be checked under acpi_pm_notifier_lock.
>
> Actually, acpi_install_notify_handler() itself need not be called
> under the lock, because it does sufficient checks of its own.
>
> So say you do
>
> mutex_lock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
>
> if (adev->wakeup.context.dev)
> goto out;
>
> adev->wakeup.ws = wakeup_source_register(dev_name(&adev->dev));
> adev->wakeup.context.dev = dev;
> adev->wakeup.context.func = func;
>
> mutex_unlock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
>
> > status = acpi_install_notify_handler(adev->handle, ACPI_SYSTEM_NOTIFY,
> > acpi_pm_notify_handler, NULL);
> > if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> > goto out;
> >
> > + mutex_lock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
>
> And here you just set notifier_present under acpi_pm_notifier_lock.
>
> > + adev->wakeup.ws = wakeup_source_register(dev_name(&adev->dev));
> > + adev->wakeup.context.dev = dev;
> > + adev->wakeup.context.func = func;
> > adev->wakeup.flags.notifier_present = true;
> > + mutex_unlock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
> >
> > out:
> > - mutex_unlock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
> > + mutex_unlock(&acpi_pm_notifier_install_lock);
> > return status;
> > }
>
> Then on removal you can clear notifier_present first and drop the lock
> around the acpi_remove_notify_handler() call and nothing bad will
> happen.
>
> If you call acpi_add_pm_notifier() twice in parallel, the first
> instance will set context.dev and the second one will see it set and
> bail out. The first instance will then do the rest.
>
> If you call acpi_remove_pm_notifier() twice in a row, the first
> instance will see notifier_present set and will clear it, so the
> second one will see notifier_present unset and it will bail out.
>
> Now, if you call acpi_remove_pm_notifier() in parallel with
> acpi_add_pm_notifier(), either the former will see notifier_present
> unset and bail out, or the latter will see context.dev unset and bail
> out.
>
> It doesn't look like the outer lock is needed, or have I missed anything?
So something like the below (totally untested) should work too, shouldn't it?
---
drivers/acpi/device_pm.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
===================================================================
--- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
+++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/device_pm.c
@@ -424,6 +424,13 @@ static void acpi_pm_notify_handler(acpi_
acpi_bus_put_acpi_device(adev);
}
+static void acpi_dev_wakeup_cleanup(struct acpi_device *adev)
+{
+ adev->wakeup.context.func = NULL;
+ adev->wakeup.context.dev = NULL;
+ wakeup_source_unregister(adev->wakeup.ws);
+}
+
/**
* acpi_add_pm_notifier - Register PM notify handler for given ACPI device.
* @adev: ACPI device to add the notify handler for.
@@ -445,17 +452,24 @@ acpi_status acpi_add_pm_notifier(struct
mutex_lock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
- if (adev->wakeup.flags.notifier_present)
+ if (adev->wakeup.context.dev || adev->wakeup.context.func)
goto out;
adev->wakeup.ws = wakeup_source_register(dev_name(&adev->dev));
adev->wakeup.context.dev = dev;
adev->wakeup.context.func = func;
+ mutex_unlock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
+
status = acpi_install_notify_handler(adev->handle, ACPI_SYSTEM_NOTIFY,
acpi_pm_notify_handler, NULL);
- if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
+
+ mutex_lock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
+
+ if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
+ acpi_dev_wakeup_cleanup(adev);
goto out;
+ }
adev->wakeup.flags.notifier_present = true;
@@ -477,17 +491,22 @@ acpi_status acpi_remove_pm_notifier(stru
if (!adev->wakeup.flags.notifier_present)
goto out;
+ adev->wakeup.flags.notifier_present = false;
+
+ mutex_unlock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
+
status = acpi_remove_notify_handler(adev->handle,
ACPI_SYSTEM_NOTIFY,
acpi_pm_notify_handler);
- if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
- goto out;
- adev->wakeup.context.func = NULL;
- adev->wakeup.context.dev = NULL;
- wakeup_source_unregister(adev->wakeup.ws);
+ mutex_lock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
- adev->wakeup.flags.notifier_present = false;
+ if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
+ adev->wakeup.flags.notifier_present = true;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ acpi_dev_wakeup_cleanup(adev);
out:
mutex_unlock(&acpi_pm_notifier_lock);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
