Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] usb: offload: move device locking to callers in offload.c
From: Greg KH
Date: Wed Mar 11 2026 - 08:27:49 EST
On Mon, Mar 09, 2026 at 02:22:04AM +0000, Guan-Yu Lin wrote:
> Update usb_offload_get() and usb_offload_put() to require that the
> caller holds the USB device lock. Remove the internal call to
> usb_lock_device() and add device_lock_assert() to ensure synchronization
> is handled by the caller. These functions continue to manage the
> device's power state via autoresume/autosuspend and update the
> offload_usage counter.
>
> Additionally, decouple the xHCI sideband interrupter lifecycle from the
> offload usage counter by removing the calls to usb_offload_get() and
> usb_offload_put() from the interrupter creation and removal paths. This
> allows interrupters to be managed independently of the device's offload
> activity status.
>
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Fixes: ef82a4803aab ("xhci: sideband: add api to trace sideband usage")
> Signed-off-by: Guan-Yu Lin <guanyulin@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Hailong Liu <hailong.liu@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/usb/core/offload.c | 34 +++++++++++---------------------
> drivers/usb/host/xhci-sideband.c | 14 +------------
> 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/offload.c b/drivers/usb/core/offload.c
> index 7c699f1b8d2b..e13a4c21d61b 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/core/offload.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/core/offload.c
> @@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
> * enabled on this usb_device; that is, another entity is actively handling USB
> * transfers. This information allows the USB driver to adjust its power
> * management policy based on offload activity.
> + * The caller must hold @udev's device lock.
Ok, but:
> *
> * Return: 0 on success. A negative error code otherwise.
> */
> @@ -27,31 +28,25 @@ int usb_offload_get(struct usb_device *udev)
Why are you not using the __must_hold() definition here?
> {
> int ret;
>
> - usb_lock_device(udev);
> - if (udev->state == USB_STATE_NOTATTACHED) {
> - usb_unlock_device(udev);
> + device_lock_assert(&udev->dev);
That's going to splat at runtime, not compile time, which is when you
really want to check for this, right?
And I thought all of the locking was messy before, and you cleaned it up
to be nicer here, why go back to the "old" way? Having a caller be
forced to have a lock held is ripe for problems...
You also are not changing any callers to usb_offload_get() in this
patch, so does this leave the kernel tree in a broken state? If not,
why not? If so, that's not ok :(
> +
> + if (udev->state == USB_STATE_NOTATTACHED)
> return -ENODEV;
> - }
>
> if (udev->state == USB_STATE_SUSPENDED ||
> - udev->offload_at_suspend) {
> - usb_unlock_device(udev);
> + udev->offload_at_suspend)
Can't that really all be on one line?
> return -EBUSY;
> - }
>
> /*
> * offload_usage could only be modified when the device is active, since
> * it will alter the suspend flow of the device.
> */
> ret = usb_autoresume_device(udev);
> - if (ret < 0) {
> - usb_unlock_device(udev);
> + if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
> - }
>
> udev->offload_usage++;
> usb_autosuspend_device(udev);
> - usb_unlock_device(udev);
>
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -64,6 +59,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(usb_offload_get);
> * The inverse operation of usb_offload_get, which drops the offload_usage of
> * a USB device. This information allows the USB driver to adjust its power
> * management policy based on offload activity.
> + * The caller must hold @udev's device lock.
> *
> * Return: 0 on success. A negative error code otherwise.
> */
> @@ -71,33 +67,27 @@ int usb_offload_put(struct usb_device *udev)
Again, use __must_hold() here, to catch build time issues.
And again, I don't see any code changes to reflect this new requirement
:(
thanks,
greg k-h