redonkable/remarkable-linux
redonkable/remarkable-linux
1
0
Fork 0
Code Releases Activity

cfg80211: fix potential deadlock regression

Browse source 
My big locking cleanups caused a problem by registering the
rfkill instance with the RTNL held, while the callback also
acquires the RTNL. This potentially causes a deadlock since
the two locks used (rfkill mutex and RTNL) can be acquired
in two different orders. Fix this by (un)registering rfkill
without holding the RTNL. This needs to be done after the
device struct is registered, but that can also be done w/o
holding the RTNL.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
This commit is contained in:
Johannes Berg 2013-06-04 19:21:08 +02:00
parent 3430140ad9
commit 256c90dedf
1 changed files with 8 additions and 15 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

23
net/wireless/core.c
View file

@ -555,14 +555,18 @@ int wiphy_register(struct wiphy *wiphy)
/* check and set up bitrates */
ieee80211_set_bitrate_flags(wiphy);
rtnl_lock();
res = device_add(&rdev->wiphy.dev);
if (res)
return res;
res = rfkill_register(rdev->rfkill);
if (res) {
rtnl_unlock();
device_del(&rdev->wiphy.dev);
return res;
}
rtnl_lock();
/* set up regulatory info */
wiphy_regulatory_register(wiphy);
@ -589,17 +593,6 @@ int wiphy_register(struct wiphy *wiphy)
cfg80211_debugfs_rdev_add(rdev);
res = rfkill_register(rdev->rfkill);
if (res) {
device_del(&rdev->wiphy.dev);
debugfs_remove_recursive(rdev->wiphy.debugfsdir);
list_del_rcu(&rdev->list);
wiphy_regulatory_deregister(wiphy);
rtnl_unlock();
return res;
}
rdev->wiphy.registered = true;
rtnl_unlock();
return 0;
@ -636,11 +629,11 @@ void wiphy_unregister(struct wiphy *wiphy)
rtnl_unlock();
__count == 0; }));
rfkill_unregister(rdev->rfkill);
rtnl_lock();
rdev->wiphy.registered = false;
rfkill_unregister(rdev->rfkill);
BUG_ON(!list_empty(&rdev->wdev_list));
/*