commit c5cae661d6 upstream.
In 65f63384 "xen: improve error handling in do_suspend" I said:
- xs_suspend()/xs_resume() and dpm_suspend_noirq()/dpm_resume_noirq() were not
nested in the obvious way.
and changed the ordering of the calls as so:
BEFORE AFTER
xs_suspend dpm_suspend_noirq
dpm_suspend_noirq xs_suspend
*SUSPEND* *SUSPEND*
dpm_resume_noirq dpm_resume_noirq
xs_resume xs_resume
Clearly this is not an improvement and I was talking rubbish.
In particular the new ordering is susceptible to a hang if a xenstore write is
in progress at the point at which the suspend kicks in. When the suspend
process calls xs_suspend it tries to take the request_mutex but if a write is
in progress it could be looping in xenbus_xs.c:read_reply() waiting for
something to arrive on &xs_state.reply_list while holding the request_mutex
(taken in the caller of read_reply).
However if we have done dpm_suspend_noirq before xs_suspend then we won't get
any more xenstore interrupts and process_msg() will never be woken up to add
anything to the reply_list.
Fix this by calling xs_suspend before dpm_suspend_noirq. If dpm_suspend_noirq
fails then make sure we go through the xs_suspend_cancel() code path.
Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>
Acked-by: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
a111c28a5d