From: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
To: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: typec: ucsi: split connector lock classes
Date: Mon, 18 May 2026 15:21:57 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <agsEZXOBMNayudR9@kuha> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260515060042.136083-1-senozhatsky@chromium.org>
On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 03:00:30PM +0900, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> Lockdep detects a possible recursive locking scenario during
> ucsi init:
>
> [ 5.418616] ============================================
> [ 5.418634] WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
> [ 5.418706] --------------------------------------------
> [ 5.418725] kworker/4:1/82 is trying to acquire lock:
> [ 5.418759] ffff888119a34648 (&con->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: ucsi_init_work+0x1a78/0x2eb0 [typec_ucsi]
> [ 5.418801]
> but task is already holding lock:
> [ 5.418835] ffff888119a34080 (&con->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: ucsi_init_work+0x1a78/0x2eb0 [typec_ucsi]
> [ 5.418884]
> other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 5.418904] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
>
> [ 5.418937] CPU0
> [ 5.418956] ----
> [ 5.418991] lock(&con->lock);
> [ 5.419013] lock(&con->lock);
> [ 5.419033]
> *** DEADLOCK ***
>
> [ 5.419387] Call Trace:
> [ 5.419406] <TASK>
> [ 5.419425] dump_stack_lvl+0x61/0xa0
> [ 5.419448] print_deadlock_bug+0x4a6/0x650
> [ 5.419483] __lock_acquire+0x62b6/0x7f50
> [ 5.419507] lock_acquire+0x11b/0x390
> [ 5.419654] __mutex_lock+0xbc/0xcd0
> [ 5.419741] ucsi_init_work+0x1a78/0x2eb0
> [ 5.419785] ? worker_thread+0xf53/0x2bc0
> [ 5.419819] worker_thread+0xff4/0x2bc0
> [ 5.419842] kthread+0x2a7/0x330
> [ 5.419863] ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10
> [ 5.419896] ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
> [ 5.419916] ret_from_fork+0x38/0x70
> [ 5.419936] ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
> [ 5.419969] ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30
> [ 5.419991] </TASK>
> [ 5.420009] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
>
> The problem is that all connector locks belong to the same
> lockdep lock class, so the following loop:
>
> for (i = 0; i < ucsi->cap.num_connectors; i++)
> ucsi_register_port(connector[i])
> mutex_lock(&connector[i]->lock)
>
> looks like a recursive acquire of the same mutex. Put each connector
> lock into a dedicated lock class so that lockdep doesn't see it as a
> possible recursion.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.c | 8 ++++++++
> drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.c b/drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.c
> index 5b7ad9e99cb9..43da7512dea0 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.c
> @@ -1642,6 +1642,7 @@ static int ucsi_register_port(struct ucsi *ucsi, struct ucsi_connector *con)
> INIT_WORK(&con->work, ucsi_handle_connector_change);
> init_completion(&con->complete);
> mutex_init(&con->lock);
> + lockdep_set_class(&con->lock, &con->lock_key);
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&con->partner_tasks);
> con->ucsi = ucsi;
>
> @@ -1887,6 +1888,9 @@ static int ucsi_init(struct ucsi *ucsi)
> goto err_reset;
> }
>
> + for (i = 0; i < ucsi->cap.num_connectors; i++)
> + lockdep_register_key(&connector[i].lock_key);
> +
> /* Register all connectors */
> for (i = 0; i < ucsi->cap.num_connectors; i++) {
> connector[i].num = i + 1;
> @@ -1916,6 +1920,9 @@ static int ucsi_init(struct ucsi *ucsi)
> return 0;
>
> err_unregister:
> + for (i = 0; i < ucsi->cap.num_connectors; i++)
> + lockdep_unregister_key(&connector[i].lock_key);
> +
> for (con = connector; con->port; con++) {
> if (con->wq)
> destroy_workqueue(con->wq);
> @@ -2166,6 +2173,7 @@ void ucsi_unregister(struct ucsi *ucsi)
> usb_power_delivery_unregister(ucsi->connector[i].pd);
> ucsi->connector[i].pd = NULL;
> typec_unregister_port(ucsi->connector[i].port);
> + lockdep_unregister_key(&ucsi->connector[i].lock_key);
> }
>
> kfree(ucsi->connector);
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.h b/drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.h
> index cff9ddc2ae21..51f6c3c0d365 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.h
> +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/ucsi/ucsi.h
> @@ -517,6 +517,7 @@ struct ucsi_connector {
>
> struct ucsi *ucsi;
> struct mutex lock; /* port lock */
> + struct lock_class_key lock_key;
> struct work_struct work;
> struct completion complete;
> struct workqueue_struct *wq;
> --
> 2.54.0.563.g4f69b47b94-goog
--
heikki
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-18 12:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-15 6:00 [PATCH] usb: typec: ucsi: split connector lock classes Sergey Senozhatsky
2026-05-18 12:21 ` Heikki Krogerus [this message]
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=agsEZXOBMNayudR9@kuha \
--to=heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=senozhatsky@chromium.org \
/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