On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 07:58:18PM -0400, ira. weiny wrote: > On Sat, Oct 31, 2015 at 12:32:29AM +0300, Alexey Khoroshilov wrote: > > Hello, > > > > hfi1_ioctl() contains many calls to might sleep functions with > > dd->hfi1_snoop.snoop_lock spinlock held (for example, access_ok, > > copy_from_user, kzalloc(GFP_KERNEL), etc.). > > > > Should dd->hfi1_snoop.snoop_lock be acquired just before updating state? > > I believe you are correct. > > I am currently in the process of pushing fixes to the staging tree. > > We have a patch which fixes this queued up but it depends on at least one other > patch in my queue. > > I will do my best to get this submitted soon. I have just posted a series which addresses this problem as well as doing general clean up on hfi1_ioctl. The specific fix is contained in this patch. [PATCH 7/8] staging/rdma/hfi1: Reduce snoop locking scope in IOCTL handler. Thanks for the report, Ira _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
