[ 3.5.y.z extended stable ] Patch "Bluetooth: Add missing lock nesting notation" has been added to staging queue
Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski
herton.krzesinski at canonical.com
Mon Jan 7 20:36:28 UTC 2013
This is a note to let you know that I have just added a patch titled
Bluetooth: Add missing lock nesting notation
to the linux-3.5.y-queue branch of the 3.5.y.z extended stable tree
which can be found at:
http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu/linux.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/linux-3.5.y-queue
If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to this tree, please
reply to this email.
For more information about the 3.5.y.z tree, see
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/Dev/ExtendedStable
Thanks.
-Herton
------
>From 8f1873b8eac1ff67ab26fd944002fdbdaaa2e8cf Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan at collabora.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 23:25:54 -0200
Subject: [PATCH] Bluetooth: Add missing lock nesting notation
commit dc2a0e20fbc85a71c63aa4330b496fda33f6bf80 upstream.
This patch fixes the following report, it happens when accepting rfcomm
connections:
[ 228.165378] =============================================
[ 228.165378] [ INFO: possible recursive locking detected ]
[ 228.165378] 3.7.0-rc1-00536-gc1d5dc4 #120 Tainted: G W
[ 228.165378] ---------------------------------------------
[ 228.165378] bluetoothd/1341 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 228.165378] (sk_lock-AF_BLUETOOTH-BTPROTO_RFCOMM){+.+...}, at:
[<ffffffffa0000aa0>] bt_accept_dequeue+0xa0/0x180 [bluetooth]
[ 228.165378]
[ 228.165378] but task is already holding lock:
[ 228.165378] (sk_lock-AF_BLUETOOTH-BTPROTO_RFCOMM){+.+...}, at:
[<ffffffffa0205118>] rfcomm_sock_accept+0x58/0x2d0 [rfcomm]
[ 228.165378]
[ 228.165378] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 228.165378] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 228.165378]
[ 228.165378] CPU0
[ 228.165378] ----
[ 228.165378] lock(sk_lock-AF_BLUETOOTH-BTPROTO_RFCOMM);
[ 228.165378] lock(sk_lock-AF_BLUETOOTH-BTPROTO_RFCOMM);
[ 228.165378]
[ 228.165378] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 228.165378]
[ 228.165378] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan at collabora.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski <herton.krzesinski at canonical.com>
---
net/bluetooth/rfcomm/sock.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/sock.c b/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/sock.c
index 2df6956..20bd148 100644
--- a/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/sock.c
+++ b/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/sock.c
@@ -486,7 +486,7 @@ static int rfcomm_sock_accept(struct socket *sock, struct socket *newsock, int f
long timeo;
int err = 0;
- lock_sock(sk);
+ lock_sock_nested(sk, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
if (sk->sk_type != SOCK_STREAM) {
err = -EINVAL;
@@ -523,7 +523,7 @@ static int rfcomm_sock_accept(struct socket *sock, struct socket *newsock, int f
release_sock(sk);
timeo = schedule_timeout(timeo);
- lock_sock(sk);
+ lock_sock_nested(sk, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
}
__set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING);
remove_wait_queue(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);
--
1.7.9.5
More information about the kernel-team
mailing list