On Sun, 2013-06-16 at 00:16 +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com> > > Since commit 3757b94 (ACPI / hotplug: Fix concurrency issues and > memory leaks) acpi_bus_scan() and acpi_bus_trim() must always be > called under acpi_scan_lock, but currently the following scenario > violating that requirement is possible: > > write_undock() > handle_eject_request() > hotplug_dock_devices() > dock_remove_acpi_device() > acpi_bus_trim() > > Fix that by making write_undock() acquire acpi_scan_lock before > calling handle_eject_request() as appropriate (begin_undock() is > under the lock too in analogy with acpi_dock_deferred_cb()). > > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com>
Looks good. Acked-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.k...@hp.com> Thanks, -Toshi > Cc: 3.9+ <sta...@vger.kernel.org> > --- > drivers/acpi/dock.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > Index: linux-pm/drivers/acpi/dock.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-pm.orig/drivers/acpi/dock.c > +++ linux-pm/drivers/acpi/dock.c > @@ -868,8 +868,10 @@ static ssize_t write_undock(struct devic > if (!count) > return -EINVAL; > > + acpi_scan_lock_acquire(); > begin_undock(dock_station); > ret = handle_eject_request(dock_station, ACPI_NOTIFY_EJECT_REQUEST); > + acpi_scan_lock_release(); > return ret ? ret: count; > } > static DEVICE_ATTR(undock, S_IWUSR, NULL, write_undock); > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
