RE: [PATCH 10/11] Revert "serial: omap: unlock the port lock"
>-Original Message- >From: Balbi, Felipe >Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 11:37 PM >To: Peter Hurley >Cc: Balbi, Felipe; Tony Lindgren; Greg KH; linux-ser...@vger.kernel.org; linux- >blueto...@vger.kernel.org; Karicheri, Muralidharan; b32...@freescale.com; >Linux OMAP >Mailing List; Linux Kernel Mailing List >Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] Revert "serial: omap: unlock the port lock" > >Hi, > >On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 10:27:13PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: >> On 03/26/2014 10:10 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >> >Hi, >> > >> >On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 08:39:11PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: >> >>On 03/25/2014 02:28 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >> >>>* Felipe Balbi [140320 12:39]: >> >>>>This reverts commit 0324a821029e1f54e7a7f8fed48693cfce42dc0e. >> >>>> >> >>>>That commit tried to fix a deadlock problem when using hci_ldisc, >> >>>>but it turns out the bug was in hci_ldsic all along where it was >> >>>>calling ->write() from within >> >>>>->write_wakeup() callback. >> >>>> >> >>>>The problem is that ->write_wakeup() was called with port lock >> >>>>held and ->write() tried to grab the same port lock. >> >>> >> >>>Should this and the next patch be earlier in the series as a fix >> >>>for the v3.15-rc cycle? Should they be cc: stable as well? >> >> >> >>Well, right now the other fix has had _zero_ testing so not really a >> >>-stable candidate just yet. >> > >> >how can you even say that ? >> >> I misunderstood when you wrote: >> >> On 03/20/2014 02:11 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >> > here's a build-tested only patch which is waiting for testing from >> > other colleagues who've got a platform to reproduce the problem: >> >> and then the version I reviewed had no Tested-by: tags. > >I wouldn't add that tag myself, but Murali (in Cc) did help testing together >with other Yes. One of our customer did the test as the problem was reported by the customer. The deadlock fix patch from Balbi (hci_ldsic) fixed the issue and customer confirmed that the issue is fixed. Murali >colleagues. > >> >How else would we have found the issue to start with ? >> >> Bug report? > >touchè :-) > >-- >balbi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 10/11] Revert "serial: omap: unlock the port lock"
Hi, On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 10:27:13PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: > On 03/26/2014 10:10 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > >Hi, > > > >On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 08:39:11PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: > >>On 03/25/2014 02:28 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >>>* Felipe Balbi [140320 12:39]: > This reverts commit 0324a821029e1f54e7a7f8fed48693cfce42dc0e. > > That commit tried to fix a deadlock problem when using > hci_ldisc, but it turns out the bug was in hci_ldsic > all along where it was calling ->write() from within > ->write_wakeup() callback. > > The problem is that ->write_wakeup() was called with > port lock held and ->write() tried to grab the same > port lock. > >>> > >>>Should this and the next patch be earlier in the series > >>>as a fix for the v3.15-rc cycle? Should they be cc: stable > >>>as well? > >> > >>Well, right now the other fix has had _zero_ testing > >>so not really a -stable candidate just yet. > > > >how can you even say that ? > > I misunderstood when you wrote: > > On 03/20/2014 02:11 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > here's a build-tested only patch which is waiting for testing from other > > colleagues who've got a platform to reproduce the problem: > > and then the version I reviewed had no Tested-by: tags. I wouldn't add that tag myself, but Murali (in Cc) did help testing together with other colleagues. > >How else would we have found the issue to start with ? > > Bug report? touchè :-) -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH 10/11] Revert "serial: omap: unlock the port lock"
On 03/25/2014 02:28 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: * Felipe Balbi [140320 12:39]: This reverts commit 0324a821029e1f54e7a7f8fed48693cfce42dc0e. That commit tried to fix a deadlock problem when using hci_ldisc, but it turns out the bug was in hci_ldsic all along where it was calling ->write() from within ->write_wakeup() callback. The problem is that ->write_wakeup() was called with port lock held and ->write() tried to grab the same port lock. Should this and the next patch be earlier in the series as a fix for the v3.15-rc cycle? Should they be cc: stable as well? Well, right now the other fix has had _zero_ testing so not really a -stable candidate just yet. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 10/11] Revert "serial: omap: unlock the port lock"
On 03/26/2014 10:10 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: Hi, On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 08:39:11PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: On 03/25/2014 02:28 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: * Felipe Balbi [140320 12:39]: This reverts commit 0324a821029e1f54e7a7f8fed48693cfce42dc0e. That commit tried to fix a deadlock problem when using hci_ldisc, but it turns out the bug was in hci_ldsic all along where it was calling ->write() from within ->write_wakeup() callback. The problem is that ->write_wakeup() was called with port lock held and ->write() tried to grab the same port lock. Should this and the next patch be earlier in the series as a fix for the v3.15-rc cycle? Should they be cc: stable as well? Well, right now the other fix has had _zero_ testing so not really a -stable candidate just yet. how can you even say that ? I misunderstood when you wrote: On 03/20/2014 02:11 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > here's a build-tested only patch which is waiting for testing from other > colleagues who've got a platform to reproduce the problem: and then the version I reviewed had no Tested-by: tags. Unless you work for some 3 letter acronym organizations, you have no clue about the fact that this was tested on a keystone 2 platform. Ok. How else would we have found the issue to start with ? Bug report? Regards, Peter Hurley -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 10/11] Revert "serial: omap: unlock the port lock"
Hi, On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 08:39:11PM -0400, Peter Hurley wrote: > On 03/25/2014 02:28 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >* Felipe Balbi [140320 12:39]: > >>This reverts commit 0324a821029e1f54e7a7f8fed48693cfce42dc0e. > >> > >>That commit tried to fix a deadlock problem when using > >>hci_ldisc, but it turns out the bug was in hci_ldsic > >>all along where it was calling ->write() from within > >>->write_wakeup() callback. > >> > >>The problem is that ->write_wakeup() was called with > >>port lock held and ->write() tried to grab the same > >>port lock. > > > >Should this and the next patch be earlier in the series > >as a fix for the v3.15-rc cycle? Should they be cc: stable > >as well? > > Well, right now the other fix has had _zero_ testing > so not really a -stable candidate just yet. how can you even say that ? Unless you work for some 3 letter acronym organizations, you have no clue about the fact that this was tested on a keystone 2 platform. How else would we have found the issue to start with ? -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH 10/11] Revert "serial: omap: unlock the port lock"
* Felipe Balbi [140320 12:39]: > This reverts commit 0324a821029e1f54e7a7f8fed48693cfce42dc0e. > > That commit tried to fix a deadlock problem when using > hci_ldisc, but it turns out the bug was in hci_ldsic > all along where it was calling ->write() from within > ->write_wakeup() callback. > > The problem is that ->write_wakeup() was called with > port lock held and ->write() tried to grab the same > port lock. Should this and the next patch be earlier in the series as a fix for the v3.15-rc cycle? Should they be cc: stable as well? Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
