Commit 85bd1798 authored by Frank Li's avatar Frank Li Committed by David S. Miller

net: fec: fix spin_lock dead lock

=========================================================
[ INFO: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected ]
3.8.0-rc5+ #82 Not tainted
---------------------------------------------------------
swapper/0/0 just changed the state of lock:
 (&(&fep->hw_lock)->rlock){..-...}, at: [<8034e2f8>] fec_enet_start_xmit+0x48/0x                      2cc
but this lock took another, SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock in the past:
(prepare_lock){+.+.+.}

and interrupts could create inverse lock ordering between them.
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:

CPU0				CPU1
----				----
lock(prepare_lock);
				local_irq_disable()
				lock(&(&fep->hw_lock)->rlock);
				lock(prepare_lock);
<Interrupt>
lock(&(&fep->hw_lock)->rlock);

*** DEADLOCK ***
Signed-off-by: default avatarFrank Li <Frank.Li@freescale.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
parent 365cc174
...@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ void fec_ptp_start_cyclecounter(struct net_device *ndev) ...@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ void fec_ptp_start_cyclecounter(struct net_device *ndev)
unsigned long flags; unsigned long flags;
int inc; int inc;
inc = 1000000000 / clk_get_rate(fep->clk_ptp); inc = 1000000000 / fep->cycle_speed;
/* grab the ptp lock */ /* grab the ptp lock */
spin_lock_irqsave(&fep->tmreg_lock, flags); spin_lock_irqsave(&fep->tmreg_lock, flags);
...@@ -363,6 +363,8 @@ void fec_ptp_init(struct net_device *ndev, struct platform_device *pdev) ...@@ -363,6 +363,8 @@ void fec_ptp_init(struct net_device *ndev, struct platform_device *pdev)
fep->ptp_caps.settime = fec_ptp_settime; fep->ptp_caps.settime = fec_ptp_settime;
fep->ptp_caps.enable = fec_ptp_enable; fep->ptp_caps.enable = fec_ptp_enable;
fep->cycle_speed = clk_get_rate(fep->clk_ptp);
spin_lock_init(&fep->tmreg_lock); spin_lock_init(&fep->tmreg_lock);
fec_ptp_start_cyclecounter(ndev); fec_ptp_start_cyclecounter(ndev);
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment