Am Dienstag, 19. Dezember 2006 23:33 schrieb J:
> Thank you for the response.
>
> > This code depends on protection from BKL.
>
> Really? I cannot find many lock_kernel calls in
> USB directory and those, which I can find,
> don't appear to protect usb_serial_disconnect
> and serial_close from being called at the same time.
serial_close is safe because serial_disconnect lowers the refcount
by one. usb_serial_probe() and usb_serial_open() both increment
the refcount; the former implicitly.
> May be the protection is at a higher level?
> Personally I don't beleive it.
> If you know how this thing is supposed to work,
> please, tell me.
The data structure to protect is serial_table. Everything else is
protected by refcounts. Therefore the interesting race is between
open and disconnect. Open is called with BKL (fs/char_dev.c::chrdev_open)
Now, regarding disconnect. It used to be called with BKL held. I haven't been
able to verify that this is still the case. If not, then there's a race.
In addition usb_serial_probe() uses get_free_serial() early in the process
before the device is ready. Without BKL, this too, races with open.
People, do we take BKL in khubd?
Regards
Oliver
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
