I have written a small driver to read some data and give it to the user. My driver can be used by more than one application, i.e. it's a reentrant driver, hence the use of a spin lock. But I discovered that copy_to_user
should not be called with a spin lock held. char_device_buf
in the following code is shared data; I have to protect it. Is there any mechanism apart from mutex to use spin lock and use copy_to_user
?
static ssize_t char_dev_read(struct file *file,
char *buf,
size_t lbuf,
loff_t *ppos)
{
int maxbytes; /* number of bytes from ppos to MAX_LENGTH */
int bytes_to_do; /* number of bytes to read */
int nbytes; /* number of bytes actually read */
maxbytes = MAX_LENGTH - *ppos;
if( maxbytes > lbuf ) bytes_to_do = lbuf;
else bytes_to_do = maxbytes;
if( bytes_to_do == 0 ) {
printk("Reached end of device\n");
return -ENOSPC; /* Causes read() to return EOF */
}
/* Tesing for accidental release */
// accidental_release();
printk(KERN_DEBUG "READER: trying for critical region lock \n");
spin_lock(&myspin);/*begin of critical region */
printk(KERN_DEBUG "READER : acquired lock: executing critical code\n");
nbytes = bytes_to_do -
copy_to_user( buf, /* to */
char_device_buf + *ppos, /* from */
bytes_to_do ); /* how many bytes */
spin_unlock(&myspin); /* end of critical region */
*ppos += nbytes;
return nbytes;
}
The reason why copy_{to,from}_user
should not be used inside a spin lock, is that these functions can sleep. Imagine this scenario (on a uni-processor machine):
mmap()
ed a filemmap()
ed areacopy_to_user
causes a page fault on that address - the memory is not present so that process goes to sleep until the data comes from the disk.Unless there is a 100% guarantee that copy_{to,from}_user
won't cause a segfault, you cannot use spin locks, but must use a sleep lock instead, such as 'mutex_lock'. Sleep locks yield control to the scheduler while spin locks do not.