[PATCH] tty: serial: samsung_tty: remove spinlock flags in interrupt handlers
Krzysztof Kozlowski
krzysztof.kozlowski at canonical.com
Tue Mar 16 09:47:53 GMT 2021
On 16/03/2021 10:02, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 07:12:12PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Since interrupt handler is called with disabled local interrupts, there
>> is no need to use the spinlock primitives disabling interrupts as well.
>
> This isn't generally true due to "threadirqs" and that can lead to
> deadlocks if the console code is called from hard irq context.
>
> Now, this is *not* the case for this particular driver since it doesn't
> even bother to take the port lock in console_write(). That should
> probably be fixed instead.
>
> See https://lore.kernel.org/r/X7kviiRwuxvPxC8O@localhost.
Thanks for the link, quite interesting! For one type of device we have
two interrupts (RX and TX) so I guess it's a valid point/risk. However
let me try to understand it more.
Assuming we had only one interrupt line, how this interrupt handler with
threadirqs could be called from hardirq context?
You wrote there:
> For console drivers this can even happen for the same interrupt as the
> generic interrupt code can call printk(), and so can any other handler
> that isn't threaded (e.g. hrtimers or explicit IRQF_NO_THREAD).
However I replaced here only interrupt handler's spin lock to non-irq.
This code path will be executed only when interrupt is masked therefore
for one interrupt line there is *no possibility of*:
-> s3c64xx_serial_handle_irq
- interrupts are masked
- s3c24xx_serial_tx_irq
- spin_lock()
-> hrtimers or other IRQF_NO_THREAD
- console_write() or something
- s3c64xx_serial_handle_irq
- s3c24xx_serial_tx_irq
- spin_lock()
Best regards,
Krzysztof
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list