Commit 256c90de authored by Johannes Berg's avatar Johannes Berg
Browse files

cfg80211: fix potential deadlock regression



My big locking cleanups caused a problem by registering the
rfkill instance with the RTNL held, while the callback also
acquires the RTNL. This potentially causes a deadlock since
the two locks used (rfkill mutex and RTNL) can be acquired
in two different orders. Fix this by (un)registering rfkill
without holding the RTNL. This needs to be done after the
device struct is registered, but that can also be done w/o
holding the RTNL.
Signed-off-by: default avatarJohannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
parent 3430140a
......@@ -555,14 +555,18 @@ int wiphy_register(struct wiphy *wiphy)
/* check and set up bitrates */
ieee80211_set_bitrate_flags(wiphy);
rtnl_lock();
res = device_add(&rdev->wiphy.dev);
if (res)
return res;
res = rfkill_register(rdev->rfkill);
if (res) {
rtnl_unlock();
device_del(&rdev->wiphy.dev);
return res;
}
rtnl_lock();
/* set up regulatory info */
wiphy_regulatory_register(wiphy);
......@@ -589,17 +593,6 @@ int wiphy_register(struct wiphy *wiphy)
cfg80211_debugfs_rdev_add(rdev);
res = rfkill_register(rdev->rfkill);
if (res) {
device_del(&rdev->wiphy.dev);
debugfs_remove_recursive(rdev->wiphy.debugfsdir);
list_del_rcu(&rdev->list);
wiphy_regulatory_deregister(wiphy);
rtnl_unlock();
return res;
}
rdev->wiphy.registered = true;
rtnl_unlock();
return 0;
......@@ -636,11 +629,11 @@ void wiphy_unregister(struct wiphy *wiphy)
rtnl_unlock();
__count == 0; }));
rfkill_unregister(rdev->rfkill);
rtnl_lock();
rdev->wiphy.registered = false;
rfkill_unregister(rdev->rfkill);
BUG_ON(!list_empty(&rdev->wdev_list));
/*
......
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment