From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Heiko Carstens" <hca@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
"Alexander Gordeev" <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
"Heiko Carstens" <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
"Vasily Gorbik" <gor@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] s390/dasd: Add __context_unsafe() attribute to various functions
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2026 13:09:16 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260806130917.3DD841F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260806130050.2057443-2-hca@linux.ibm.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] The patch uses `__context_unsafe` to silence a valid static analysis warning about a cross-thread mutex unlock in `do_pe_handler_work`, hiding a severe locking API violation.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH 1/2] s390/dasd: Add __context_unsafe() attribute to various functions ---
commit 0764dc821ba7e47d621de5b2696256130f3eee09
Author: Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
s390/dasd: Add __context_unsafe() attribute to various functions
This patch disables context analysis for various functions to avoid compile
time warnings using clang caused by conditional locking. The __context_unsafe()
attribute is used to provide a short comment on why it is disabled.
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eckd.c b/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eckd.c
> index 74fe73b5738ab..e908e2f29919e 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eckd.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/block/dasd_eckd.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -1432,6 +1432,7 @@ static void dasd_eckd_path_available_action(struct dasd_device *device,
> }
>
> static void do_pe_handler_work(struct work_struct *work)
> +__context_unsafe(/* Conditional locking */)
> {
> struct pe_handler_work_data *data;
> struct dasd_device *device;
[ ... ]
> @@ -1465,6 +1466,7 @@ static void do_pe_handler_work(struct work_struct *work)
>
> static int dasd_eckd_pe_handler(struct dasd_device *device,
> __u8 tbvpm, __u8 fcsecpm)
> +__context_unsafe(/* Conditional locking */)
> {
> struct pe_handler_work_data *data;
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does silencing this warning hide a
legitimate cross-thread mutex unlock?
When kzalloc fails in dasd_eckd_pe_handler(), it calls mutex_trylock(),
establishing the current interrupted task as the lock owner:
dasd_eckd_pe_handler() {
...
data = kzalloc_obj(*data, GFP_ATOMIC | GFP_DMA);
if (!data) {
if (mutex_trylock(&dasd_pe_handler_mutex)) {
data = pe_handler_worker;
data->isglobal = 1;
...
schedule_work(&data->worker);
}
The lock is then released from a different task (the workqueue worker thread)
in do_pe_handler_work():
do_pe_handler_work() {
...
if (data->isglobal)
mutex_unlock(&dasd_pe_handler_mutex);
...
}
Unlocking a struct mutex from a task other than the one that acquired it
strictly violates mutex semantics, which could cause debug warnings or
panics.
Additionally, mutex_trylock() in atomic context (inferred from GFP_ATOMIC
usage) violates lockdep wait-context rules and PREEMPT_RT requirements.
Could this code be restructured to avoid the cross-thread unlock rather than
silencing the warning?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260806130050.2057443-1-hca@linux.ibm.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-06 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-06 13:00 [PATCH 0/2] s390/block: Enable CONTEXT_ANALYSIS Heiko Carstens
2026-08-06 13:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] s390/dasd: Add __context_unsafe() attribute to various functions Heiko Carstens
2026-08-06 13:09 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-06 14:06 ` Heiko Carstens
2026-08-06 14:09 ` Stefan Haberland
2026-08-06 16:34 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-08-06 18:09 ` Heiko Carstens
2026-08-06 13:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] s390/block: Enable CONTEXT_ANALYSIS Heiko Carstens
2026-08-06 13:02 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-06 16:34 ` Bart Van Assche
2026-08-06 13:09 ` [PATCH 0/2] " Stefan Haberland
2026-08-06 14:14 ` Jens Axboe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260806130917.3DD841F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.