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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox