mirror of
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
synced 2025-01-18 06:15:12 +00:00
256a9978eb
Give the bus_lock and msg_lock of each bus a different unique key so that it is possible to acquire the locks of multiple buses without lockdep asserting a possible deadlock. Using mutex_init() to initialize a mutex gives all those mutexes the same lock class. Lockdep checking treats it as an error to attempt to take a mutex while already holding a mutex of the same class. This causes a lockdep assert when sdw_acquire_bus_lock() attempts to lock multiple buses, and when do_bank_switch() takes multiple msg_lock. [ 138.697350] WARNING: possible recursive locking detected [ 138.697366] 6.3.0-test #1 Tainted: G E [ 138.697380] -------------------------------------------- [ 138.697394] play/903 is trying to acquire lock: [ 138.697409] ffff99b8c41aa8c8 (&bus->bus_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: sdw_prepare_stream+0x52/0x2e0 [ 138.697443] but task is already holding lock: [ 138.697468] ffff99b8c41af8c8 (&bus->bus_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: sdw_prepare_stream+0x52/0x2e0 [ 138.697493] other info that might help us debug this: [ 138.697521] Possible unsafe locking scenario: [ 138.697540] CPU0 [ 138.697550] ---- [ 138.697559] lock(&bus->bus_lock); [ 138.697570] lock(&bus->bus_lock); [ 138.697581] *** DEADLOCK *** Giving each mutex a unique key allows multiple to be held without triggering a lockdep assert. But note that it does not allow them to be taken in one order then a different order. If two mutexes are taken in the order A, B then they must always be taken in that order otherwise they could deadlock. Signed-off-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@opensource.cirrus.com> Reviewed-by: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230615141208.679011-1-rf@opensource.cirrus.com Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>