On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 01:54:07PM +0300, Octavian Purdila wrote: > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 12:23 PM, Johan Hovold <johan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 07:07:31PM +0300, Octavian Purdila wrote: > > > >> +static void dln2_rx_transfer(struct dln2_dev *dln2, struct urb *urb, > >> + u16 handle, u16 rx_slot) > >> +{ > >> + struct dln2_mod_rx_slots *rxs = &dln2->mod_rx_slots[handle]; > >> + struct dln2_rx_context *rxc; > >> + struct device *dev = &dln2->interface->dev; > >> + > >> + spin_lock(&rxs->lock); > > > > You must use spin_lock_irqsave here as you call it from the completion > > handler. > > Why? AFAICS the completion handler gets called from the HCD irq handler: The completion handler is currently called with local interrupts disabled but that is about to change once all drivers have been updated: http://marc.info/?l=linux-usb&m=137353360511003&w=2 In this case you could probably get away with not disabling interrupts anyway, but using the irqsave versions would make it obvious. > >> +static void dln2_disconnect(struct usb_interface *interface) > >> +{ > >> + struct dln2_dev *dln2 = usb_get_intfdata(interface); > >> + int i, j; > >> + > >> + /* don't allow starting new transfers */ > >> + spin_lock(&dln2->disconnect_lock); > >> + dln2->disconnect = true; > >> + spin_unlock(&dln2->disconnect_lock); > >> + > >> + /* cancel in progress transfers */ > >> + for (i = 0; i < DLN2_HANDLES; i++) { > >> + struct dln2_mod_rx_slots *rxs = &dln2->mod_rx_slots[i]; > >> + unsigned long flags; > >> + > >> + spin_lock_irqsave(&rxs->lock, flags); > > > > Just stick to spin_lock in this function. > > AFAICS disconnect is called from a kernel thread. Are there guarantees > that we can't get a call to the completion routine while we are > running it? Brain fart, nevermind. Johan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html