On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 8:00 AM, Jiang Liu <liuj97@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/11/2012 08:24 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
>> On 05/11/2012 07:54 AM, Amos Kong wrote:
>>> On 05/11/2012 02:55 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 01:09:13AM +0800, Jiang Liu wrote:
>>>>> On 05/10/2012 11:44 PM, Amos Kong wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c b/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c
>>>>>> index 806c44f..a7442d9 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/hotplug/acpiphp_glue.c
>>>>>> @@ -885,7 +885,7 @@ static void disable_bridges(struct pci_bus *bus)
>>>>>> static int disable_device(struct acpiphp_slot *slot)
>>>>>> {
>>>>>> struct acpiphp_func *func;
>>>>>> - struct pci_dev *pdev;
>>>>>> + struct pci_dev *pdev, *tmp;
>>>>>> struct pci_bus *bus = slot->bridge->pci_bus;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /* The slot will be enabled when func 0 is added, so check
>>>>>> @@ -902,9 +902,10 @@ static int disable_device(struct acpiphp_slot *slot)
>>>>>> func->bridge = NULL;
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> - pdev = pci_get_slot(slot->bridge->pci_bus,
>>>>>> - PCI_DEVFN(slot->device, func->function));
>>>>>> - if (pdev) {
>>>>>> + list_for_each_entry_safe(pdev, tmp, &bus->devices, bus_list) {
>>>>>> + if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) != slot->device)
>>>>>> + continue;
I think the concept is good: in enable_device(), we use
pci_scan_slot(), which scans all possible functions in the slot. So
in disable_device() we should do something symmetric to remove all the
functions.
>>>>>> +
>>>>> The pci_bus_sem lock should be acquired when walking the bus->devices list.
>>>>> Otherwise it may cause invalid memory access if another thread is modifying
>>>>> the bus->devices list concurrently.
>>
>> pci_bus_sem lock is only request for writing &bus->devices list, right ?
>> and this protection already exists in pci_destory_dev().
> That's for writer. For reader to walk the pci_bus->devices list, you also need
> to acquire the reader lock by down_read(&pci_bus_sem). Please refer to
> pci_get_slot() for example. This especially import for native OS because there
> may be multiple PCI slots/devices on the bus.
There is a lot of existing code that walks bus->devices without
holding pci_bus_sem, but most of it is boot-time code that is arguably
safe (though I think things like pcibios_fixup_bus() are poorly
designed and don't fit well in the hotplug-enabled world).
In this case, I do think we need to protect against updates while
we're walking bus->devices. It's probably not trivial because
__pci_remove_bus_device() calls pci_destroy_dev(), where we do the
down_write(), so simply wrapping the whole thing with down_read() will
cause a deadlock.
Kenji-san, Yinghai, do you have any input?
Bjorn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
