Battery: sysfs_remove_battery(): possible circular locking
Commit
2d2fd99a864dbe6e78127af1ce58f73debacf181
Author: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@intel.com>
ACPI / Battery: Resolve the race condition in the sysfs_remove_battery()
fixed BUG https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35642 , but as a side
effect made lockdep unhappy with sysfs_remove_battery():
[14818.477168]
[14818.477170] =======================================================
[14818.477200] [ INFO: possible circular locking dependency detected ]
[14818.477221]
3.1.0-dbg-07865-g1280ea8-dirty #668
[14818.477236] -------------------------------------------------------
[14818.477257] s2ram/1599 is trying to acquire lock:
[14818.477276] (s_active#8){++++.+}, at: [<
ffffffff81169147>] sysfs_addrm_finish+0x31/0x5a
[14818.477323]
[14818.477325] but task is already holding lock:
[14818.477350] (&battery->lock){+.+.+.}, at: [<
ffffffffa0047278>] sysfs_remove_battery+0x10/0x4b [battery]
[14818.477395]
[14818.477397] which lock already depends on the new lock.
[14818.477399]
[..]
[14818.479121] stack backtrace:
[14818.479148] Pid: 1599, comm: s2ram Not tainted
3.1.0-dbg-07865-g1280ea8-dirty #668
[14818.479175] Call Trace:
[14818.479198] [<
ffffffff814828c3>] print_circular_bug+0x293/0x2a4
[14818.479228] [<
ffffffff81070cb5>] __lock_acquire+0xfe4/0x164b
[14818.479260] [<
ffffffff81169147>] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x31/0x5a
[14818.479288] [<
ffffffff810718d2>] lock_acquire+0x138/0x1ac
[14818.479316] [<
ffffffff81169147>] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x31/0x5a
[14818.479345] [<
ffffffff81168a79>] sysfs_deactivate+0x9b/0xec
[14818.479373] [<
ffffffff81169147>] ? sysfs_addrm_finish+0x31/0x5a
[14818.479405] [<
ffffffff81169147>] sysfs_addrm_finish+0x31/0x5a
[14818.479433] [<
ffffffff81167bc5>] sysfs_hash_and_remove+0x54/0x77
[14818.479461] [<
ffffffff811681b9>] sysfs_remove_file+0x12/0x14
[14818.479488] [<
ffffffff81385bf8>] device_remove_file+0x12/0x14
[14818.479516] [<
ffffffff81386504>] device_del+0x119/0x17c
[14818.479542] [<
ffffffff81386575>] device_unregister+0xe/0x1a
[14818.479570] [<
ffffffff813c6ef9>] power_supply_unregister+0x23/0x27
[14818.479601] [<
ffffffffa004729c>] sysfs_remove_battery+0x34/0x4b [battery]
[14818.479632] [<
ffffffffa004778f>] battery_notify+0x2c/0x3a [battery]
[14818.479662] [<
ffffffff8148fe82>] notifier_call_chain+0x74/0xa1
[14818.479692] [<
ffffffff810624b4>] __blocking_notifier_call_chain+0x6c/0x89
[14818.479722] [<
ffffffff810624e0>] blocking_notifier_call_chain+0xf/0x11
[14818.479751] [<
ffffffff8107e40e>] pm_notifier_call_chain+0x15/0x27
[14818.479770] [<
ffffffff8107ee1a>] enter_state+0xa7/0xd5
[14818.479782] [<
ffffffff8107e341>] state_store+0xaa/0xc0
[14818.479795] [<
ffffffff8107e297>] ? pm_async_store+0x45/0x45
[14818.479807] [<
ffffffff81248837>] kobj_attr_store+0x17/0x19
[14818.479820] [<
ffffffff81167e27>] sysfs_write_file+0x103/0x13f
[14818.479834] [<
ffffffff81109037>] vfs_write+0xad/0x13d
[14818.479847] [<
ffffffff811092b2>] sys_write+0x45/0x6c
[14818.479860] [<
ffffffff81492f92>] system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b
This patch introduces separate lock to struct acpi_battery to
grab in sysfs_remove_battery() instead of battery->lock.
So fix by Lan Tianyu is still there, we just grab independent lock.
Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>
Tested-by: Lan Tianyu <tianyu.lan@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>