Re: [PATCH] opp: of: drop incorrect lockdep_assert_held()

[Niklas Cassel]

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 11:00:05AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 10-10-19, 16:00, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > _find_opp_of_np() doesn't traverse the list of OPP tables but instead
> > just the entries within an OPP table and so only requires to lock the
> > OPP table itself.
> > 
> > The lockdep_assert_held() was added there by mistake and isn't really
> > required.
> > 
> > Fixes: 5d6d106fa455 ("OPP: Populate required opp tables from "required-opps" property")
> > Cc: v5.0+ <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # v5.0+
> > Reported-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/opp/of.c | 2 --
> >  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/opp/of.c b/drivers/opp/of.c
> > index 1813f5ad5fa2..6dc41faf74b5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/opp/of.c
> > +++ b/drivers/opp/of.c
> > @@ -77,8 +77,6 @@ static struct dev_pm_opp *_find_opp_of_np(struct opp_table *opp_table,
> >  {
> >  	struct dev_pm_opp *opp;
> >  
> > -	lockdep_assert_held(&opp_table_lock);
> > -
> >  	mutex_lock(&opp_table->lock);
> >  
> >  	list_for_each_entry(opp, &opp_table->opp_list, node) {
> 
> @Niklas, any inputs from your side  here would be appreciated :)

Tested-by: Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@xxxxxxxxxx>

After this patch, there is still a single lockdep_assert_held()
left, inside _find_table_of_opp_np(), since you kept this,
I assume that that one is still needed?

Kind regards,
Niklas