Hi Jiri, > (I sent this a week ago but it seems to have got lost in other noise, > resending) > > From: Jiri Kosina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Bluetooth: postpone hci_dev unregistration > > Commit b40df57 substituted bh_lock_sock() in hci_sock_dev_event() for > lock_sock() when unregistering HCI device, in order to prevent deadlock > against locking in l2cap_connect_cfm() from softirq context. > > This however introduces another problem - hci_sock_dev_event() for > HCI_DEV_UNREG can also be triggered in atomic context, in which calling > lock_sock() is not safe as it could sleep. Reported by Jeremy Fitzhardinge > at http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/4/23/271 > > This patch moves the detaching of sockets from hci_device into workqueue, > so that lock_sock() can be used safely. This requires movement of > deallocation of hci_dev - deallocating device just after > hci_unregister_dev() would be too soon, as it could happen before the > workqueue has been run.
I saw the report on LKML, but I am not really comfortable with this approach. It feels like an ugly hack. This needs more thinking and I think that simplifying the looking between HCI and L2CAP should be the goal. Regards Marcel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
