From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Guilherme G. Piccoli" Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/30] coresight: cpu-debug: Replace mutex with mutex_trylock on panic notifier Date: Mon, 9 May 2022 10:09:21 -0300 Message-ID: <65f24bc5-2211-0139-ee12-b2608e81ceb1@igalia.com> References: <20220427224924.592546-1-gpiccoli@igalia.com> <20220427224924.592546-10-gpiccoli@igalia.com> <3cafe4fd-8a0b-2633-44a3-2995abd6c38c@arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=igalia.com; s=20170329; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From: References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Sender:Reply-To: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=c6E44QfcLWCPcpfVVn8DZm/tazb9qDNjecxU8jgjjwM=; b=JQ1X+XDjDPRoAxPLkbe9tWes8w l11iC7oa/HVnyRK3qB7UvK9JEgQqPIREqD5654T0lMLes3kGheOm/R45s0nxu4hyBPxmCTVnzlJkN ZvlwDaZFuWVIh4IaLUzoP+QdJvpm215SH2+0rVomODoRdVpIAavgxOQl3rDnkTMN+fyPnfNOV7B7S PwRkKHJor0sF94EKnip9+x+OMSUvYBWlrOB2NiCodRGVM8ztswBp00gdyDLuMLY0TLuRV/nOMh+Z7 dku4FKzrs/p9E3LkAgwz4nFi/oHL/EcQWXaMAdDUro5POIL0/IvuDCL2llWo8K6mm9F1PYJhGhMV8 hibQS8t Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <3cafe4fd-8a0b-2633-44a3-2995abd6c38c-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org> List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Suzuki K Poulose , akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, bhe-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, pmladek-IBi9RG/b67k@public.gmane.org, kexec-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list-dY08KVG/lbpWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org, coresight-cunTk1MwBs8s++Sfvej+rw@public.gmane.org, linuxppc-dev-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, linux-alpha-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-edac-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-hyperv-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-leds-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-mips-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-parisc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-pm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-remoteproc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-s390-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-um-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-xtensa-PjhNF2WwrV/0Sa2dR60CXw@public.gmane.org, netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, openipmi-developer-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, rcu-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, sparclinux-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, xen-devel-GuqFBffKawtpuQazS67q72D2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org, x86-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, kernel-dev-wEGTBA9jqPzQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, kernel-WeLdAqEWwDvk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org, halves-Z7WLFzj8eWMS+FvcfC7Uqw@public.gmane.org, fabiomirmar-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, alejandro.j.jimenez@ora On 28/04/2022 05:11, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > Hi Guilherme, > > On 27/04/2022 23:49, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote: >> The panic notifier infrastructure executes registered callbacks when >> a panic event happens - such callbacks are executed in atomic context, >> with interrupts and preemption disabled in the running CPU and all other >> CPUs disabled. That said, mutexes in such context are not a good idea. >> >> This patch replaces a regular mutex with a mutex_trylock safer approach; >> given the nature of the mutex used in the driver, it should be pretty >> uncommon being unable to acquire such mutex in the panic path, hence >> no functional change should be observed (and if it is, that would be >> likely a deadlock with the regular mutex). >> >> Fixes: 2227b7c74634 ("coresight: add support for CPU debug module") >> Cc: Leo Yan >> Cc: Mathieu Poirier >> Cc: Mike Leach >> Cc: Suzuki K Poulose >> Signed-off-by: Guilherme G. Piccoli > > How would you like to proceed with queuing this ? I am happy > either way. In case you plan to push this as part of this > series (I don't see any potential conflicts) : > > Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose Hi Suzuki, some other maintainers are taking the patches to their next branches for example. I'm working on V2, and I guess in the end would be nice to reduce the size of the series a bit. So, do you think you could pick this one for your coresight/next branch (or even for rc cycle, your call - this is really a fix)? This way, I won't re-submit this one in V2, since it's gonna be merged already in your branch. Thanks in advance, Guilherme