diff options
| author | Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk> | 2012-11-20 23:25:54 -0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> | 2013-01-11 09:07:17 -0800 |
| commit | 7e2741804be03faf0eaba1df228e2ba5c07ecdd7 (patch) | |
| tree | e9740f5b6e5a6f93343732adfc8e55b75680de1c | |
| parent | 2145cea1e0be3262768fef384a87f426ecad06fe (diff) | |
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@collabora.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
| -rw-r--r-- | net/bluetooth/rfcomm/sock.c | 4 |
1 files changed, 2 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/sock.c b/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/sock.c index 717c43ac0c7..8d1edd7207d 100644 --- a/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/sock.c +++ b/net/bluetooth/rfcomm/sock.c @@ -485,7 +485,7 @@ 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; @@ -522,7 +522,7 @@ 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); |