From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Corey Minyard <corey@minyard.net>,
Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>, Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 6.19.y 1/2] ipmi: Consolidate the run to completion checking for xmit msgs lock
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 12:51:54 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260317165155.226620-1-sashal@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2026031713-overview-schnapps-75f6@gregkh>
From: Corey Minyard <corey@minyard.net>
[ Upstream commit 1d90e6c1a56f6ab83e5c9d30ded19e7ac8155713 ]
It made things hard to read, move the check to a function.
Signed-off-by: Corey Minyard <corey@minyard.net>
Reviewed-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@debian.org>
Stable-dep-of: 62cd145453d5 ("ipmi:msghandler: Handle error returns from the SMI sender")
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++-------------
1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c
index a590a67294e24..a042b1596933f 100644
--- a/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c
+++ b/drivers/char/ipmi/ipmi_msghandler.c
@@ -602,6 +602,22 @@ static int __ipmi_bmc_register(struct ipmi_smi *intf,
static int __scan_channels(struct ipmi_smi *intf,
struct ipmi_device_id *id, bool rescan);
+static void ipmi_lock_xmit_msgs(struct ipmi_smi *intf, int run_to_completion,
+ unsigned long *flags)
+{
+ if (run_to_completion)
+ return;
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, *flags);
+}
+
+static void ipmi_unlock_xmit_msgs(struct ipmi_smi *intf, int run_to_completion,
+ unsigned long *flags)
+{
+ if (run_to_completion)
+ return;
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, *flags);
+}
+
static void free_ipmi_user(struct kref *ref)
{
struct ipmi_user *user = container_of(ref, struct ipmi_user, refcount);
@@ -1878,11 +1894,9 @@ static void smi_send(struct ipmi_smi *intf,
int run_to_completion = READ_ONCE(intf->run_to_completion);
unsigned long flags = 0;
- if (!run_to_completion)
- spin_lock_irqsave(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, flags);
+ ipmi_lock_xmit_msgs(intf, run_to_completion, &flags);
smi_msg = smi_add_send_msg(intf, smi_msg, priority);
- if (!run_to_completion)
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, flags);
+ ipmi_unlock_xmit_msgs(intf, run_to_completion, &flags);
if (smi_msg)
handlers->sender(intf->send_info, smi_msg);
@@ -4826,8 +4840,7 @@ static void smi_work(struct work_struct *t)
* message delivery.
*/
restart:
- if (!run_to_completion)
- spin_lock_irqsave(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, flags);
+ ipmi_lock_xmit_msgs(intf, run_to_completion, &flags);
if (intf->curr_msg == NULL && !intf->in_shutdown) {
struct list_head *entry = NULL;
@@ -4843,8 +4856,7 @@ static void smi_work(struct work_struct *t)
intf->curr_msg = newmsg;
}
}
- if (!run_to_completion)
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, flags);
+ ipmi_unlock_xmit_msgs(intf, run_to_completion, &flags);
if (newmsg) {
cc = intf->handlers->sender(intf->send_info, newmsg);
@@ -4852,13 +4864,9 @@ static void smi_work(struct work_struct *t)
if (newmsg->recv_msg)
deliver_err_response(intf,
newmsg->recv_msg, cc);
- if (!run_to_completion)
- spin_lock_irqsave(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock,
- flags);
+ ipmi_lock_xmit_msgs(intf, run_to_completion, &flags);
intf->curr_msg = NULL;
- if (!run_to_completion)
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock,
- flags);
+ ipmi_unlock_xmit_msgs(intf, run_to_completion, &flags);
ipmi_free_smi_msg(newmsg);
newmsg = NULL;
goto restart;
@@ -4928,16 +4936,14 @@ void ipmi_smi_msg_received(struct ipmi_smi *intf,
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&intf->waiting_rcv_msgs_lock,
flags);
- if (!run_to_completion)
- spin_lock_irqsave(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, flags);
+ ipmi_lock_xmit_msgs(intf, run_to_completion, &flags);
/*
* We can get an asynchronous event or receive message in addition
* to commands we send.
*/
if (msg == intf->curr_msg)
intf->curr_msg = NULL;
- if (!run_to_completion)
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&intf->xmit_msgs_lock, flags);
+ ipmi_unlock_xmit_msgs(intf, run_to_completion, &flags);
if (run_to_completion)
smi_work(&intf->smi_work);
--
2.51.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-17 16:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-17 11:34 FAILED: patch "[PATCH] ipmi:msghandler: Handle error returns from the SMI sender" failed to apply to 6.19-stable tree gregkh
2026-03-17 16:51 ` Sasha Levin [this message]
2026-03-17 16:51 ` [PATCH 6.19.y 2/2] ipmi:msghandler: Handle error returns from the SMI sender Sasha Levin
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=20260317165155.226620-1-sashal@kernel.org \
--to=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=corey@minyard.net \
--cc=leitao@debian.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.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