Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:9848:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id x8csp4215533pxf; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 02:09:17 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzix1dhbvOuomA5COvR657WPf9O2xUY1WYjHrl0NTvNuERHviZxjvM+cF2xUgiVcx1Hda6h X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:104c:: with SMTP id e12mr31558854edu.108.1617095356798; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 02:09:16 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1617095356; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=QkJresm3z9IHsP9l03tXepHH4Nb/696YDEuYPlKlGsifRDdfnXRqWf6HRgQfsIUzAD EliS/urHheKVxvCtQBprv6HnYDWiSVtxqMUlkrKETrrVKAlB9J4iNsz5Vd5yG+4DdX8L xhV8QGeWwbnnS7jDrWY5Uw+vRm1xMfWIlSIXf9t6XEiBEKHq++v39MayTakQq/i5rG04 PXjjN+OMQZ5W1sUszhoO/uXuRONrvxwxmvypPF5ufMN9afmdyj/u2tpZbKghlmm6g6u4 HbKwaDts3whhfS0BtgtLDsGCKyFZhFiboArjkKUERbWlYZtc9z0OrsDXW8L4jylTlfcP B0AA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:ironport-sdr :ironport-sdr; bh=O/ghpUGA9BwqAFXI56iIrbWpyvVIo/EE6z24PVYTdtE=; b=ro+cwueVu/brH5ZPpdQLDG/Oikb9T9onN6lNmU7ZhbIQQGW+yofZ5fFSue5RWOSF1w t6GueO0vj/FHw/mJpciwClUKp/TvFe/la1wdS/s9l2yZcNV036g1TaBgYti8FjbIK7/J G1dX50Iwh2XAajDIgBkHjm+2NfBbBdzMi0u5MqkweRV4DbWp45lwWHTKP1917PxcVyM2 AiGsmI0RfGrCAGPLjFXebtHT0lwx3oLOMoroijldrWbUxUhmGvgEUNClLMJJgyciFLnH st5e3QSB2gRUSEn+bGfT/pwJTmdLEmMSW48xWI+65KdTckunUXhmOTvtyXsrdD12L+Hf HpMw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g7si904784edb.286.2021.03.30.02.08.53; Tue, 30 Mar 2021 02:09:16 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231698AbhC3JHp (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 05:07:45 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:20670 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231858AbhC3JHj (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 05:07:39 -0400 IronPort-SDR: 9sp2oeizy7PepEhxo6Juqo8GPlLVd6ht/nHNAEwOwD/FIja3xBEXLEIEjZjnQl9gQTnRCj2DAc frLps7u6FSuQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6000,8403,9938"; a="188460374" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,290,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="188460374" Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga102.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Mar 2021 02:07:38 -0700 IronPort-SDR: ib6G/Hb2XuCfEYn7nbnGgRtKMarSnykGETsH96NU6JvA5eq9UZ6aTK7o5ZtrX5aX1cel3ADC1N FSl+iar7UiUw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,290,1610438400"; d="scan'208";a="516360032" Received: from kuha.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.162]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with SMTP; 30 Mar 2021 02:07:35 -0700 Received: by kuha.fi.intel.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:07:35 +0300 Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2021 12:07:35 +0300 From: Heikki Krogerus To: Alan Stern Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Benson Leung , Prashant Malani , Guenter Roeck , linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] usb: Iterator for ports Message-ID: References: <20210329084426.78138-1-heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com> <20210329084426.78138-6-heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com> <20210329184946.GA944482@rowland.harvard.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210329184946.GA944482@rowland.harvard.edu> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 02:49:46PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Mon, Mar 29, 2021 at 11:44:25AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > Introducing usb_for_each_port(). It works the same way as > > usb_for_each_dev(), but instead of going through every USB > > device in the system, it walks through the USB ports in the > > system. > > > > Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus > > --- > > drivers/usb/core/usb.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > include/linux/usb.h | 1 + > > 2 files changed, 47 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/usb.c b/drivers/usb/core/usb.c > > index 2ce3667ec6fae..62368c4ed37af 100644 > > --- a/drivers/usb/core/usb.c > > +++ b/drivers/usb/core/usb.c > > @@ -398,6 +398,52 @@ int usb_for_each_dev(void *data, int (*fn)(struct usb_device *, void *)) > > } > > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(usb_for_each_dev); > > > > +struct each_hub_arg { > > + void *data; > > + int (*fn)(struct device *, void *); > > +}; > > + > > +static int __each_hub(struct usb_device *hdev, void *data) > > +{ > > + struct each_hub_arg *arg = (struct each_hub_arg *)data; > > + struct usb_hub *hub; > > + int ret = 0; > > + int i; > > + > > + hub = usb_hub_to_struct_hub(hdev); > > + if (!hub) > > + return 0; > > What happens if the hub is removed exactly now? Although hdev is > reference-counted (and the loop iterator does take a reference to it), > usb_hub_to_struct_hub doesn't take a reference to hub. And hub->ports > isn't refcounted at all. If the hub is removed right now, and if hub_disconnect() also manages to remove the ports before we have time to take the lock below, then hdev->maxchild will be 0 by the time we can take the lock. In that case nothing happens here. If on the other hand we manage to acquire the usb_port_peer_mutex before hub_disconnect(), then hub_disconnect() will simply have to wait until we are done, and only after that remove the ports. > > + mutex_lock(&usb_port_peer_mutex); > > + > > + for (i = 0; i < hdev->maxchild; i++) { > > + ret = arg->fn(&hub->ports[i]->dev, arg->data); > > + if (ret) > > + break; > > + } > > + > > + mutex_unlock(&usb_port_peer_mutex); > > I have a feeling that it would be better to take and release this mutex > in usb_for_each_port (or its caller), so that it is held over the whole > loop. I disagree. The lock is for the ports, not the hubs. We should take the lock when we are going through the ports of a hub, but release it between the hubs. Otherwise we will be only keeping things on hold for a long period of time for no good reason (I for example have to evaluate the _PLD of every single port which takes a lot of time). We don't need to prevent other things from happening to the hubs at the same time. thanks, -- heikki