On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 01:35:51PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 12:00:19PM -0400, Benjamin Romer wrote: > > From: Neil Horman <nhorman@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Missed this in my initial review. The usage counter that guards against > > kthread task is horribly racy. The atomic is self consistent, but theres > > nothing that prevents the service_resp_queue function from re-incrementing > > it immediately after the check in disable_with_timeout is complete. Its > > just a improper usage of atomics as a serialization mechanism. > > > > Instead use kthread_park to pause the thread in its activity so that > > buffers can be properly freed without racing against usage in > > service_resp_queue > > > > Signed-off-by: Neil Horman <nhorman@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Romer <benjamin.romer@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/staging/unisys/visornic/visornic_main.c | 23 ++++++----------------- > > kernel/kthread.c | 4 ++++ > > Sorry, staging drivers can not modify other parts of the kernel. Adding > exports for these kthread functions needs to happen as a "real" patch > that the kthread maintainer accepts, I can't take this. > > greg k-h Thats fine, we can split out the kthread_park exports and propose them on lkml separately. Thanks Neil _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
