Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1536696866.3024.151.camel@codethink.co.uk>
References: <20180823074918.641878835@linuxfoundation.org> <20180823074922.442947994@linuxfoundation.org>
 <1536696866.3024.151.camel@codethink.co.uk>
From:   Michael Chan <michael.chan@broadcom.com>
Date:   Tue, 11 Sep 2018 13:58:17 -0700
Message-ID: <CACKFLinHTVrapMyU=OLcb+MS0RFxS69eHfRjirYvB2mi8Pkf0A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 51/79] bnxt_en: Fix for system hang if request_irq fails
To:     Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk>
Cc:     Vikas Gupta <vikas.gupta@broadcom.com>, stable@vger.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@microsoft.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 1:14 PM, Ben Hutchings
<ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-08-23 at 09:53 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> 4.4-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>>
>> ------------------
>>
>> From: Vikas Gupta <vikas.gupta@broadcom.com>
>>
>> [ Upstream commit c58387ab1614f6d7fb9e244f214b61e7631421fc ]
>>
>> Fix bug in the error code path when bnxt_request_irq() returns failure.
>> bnxt_disable_napi() should not be called in this error path because
>> NAPI has not been enabled yet.
> [...]
>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt.c
>> @@ -4591,7 +4591,7 @@ static int __bnxt_open_nic(struct bnxt *
>>               rc = bnxt_request_irq(bp);
>>               if (rc) {
>>                       netdev_err(bp->dev, "bnxt_request_irq err: %x\n", rc);
>> -                     goto open_err;
>> +                     goto open_err_irq;
>>               }
>>       }
>>
>> @@ -4629,6 +4629,8 @@ static int __bnxt_open_nic(struct bnxt *
>>
>>  open_err:
>>       bnxt_disable_napi(bp);
>> +
>> +open_err_irq:
>>       bnxt_del_napi(bp);
>
> Shouldn't this added statement be conditional on irq_re_init?
>

Unconditional call is more correct, because when open fails, we clean
up everything, including the NAPI that was added just now or during a
previous call.

In other words, the NAPI struct is always valid here whether
irq_re_init is true or not.  And we always delete it if open fails.

Thanks.