[PATCH v1] driver core: Fix device_pm_lock() locking for device links

[Saravana Kannan]

This commit fixes two issues:

1. The lockdep warning reported by Dong Aisheng <dongas86@xxxxxxxxx> [1].

It is a warning about a cycle (dpm_list_mtx --> kn->active#3 --> fw_lock)
that was introduced when device-link devices were added to expose device
link information in sysfs.

The patch that "introduced" this cycle can't be reverted because it's fixes
a real SRCU issue and also ensures that the device-link device is deleted
as soon as the device-link is deleted. This is important to avoid sysfs
name collisions if the device-link is create again immediately (this can
happen a lot with deferred probing).

2. device_link_drop_managed() is not grabbing device_pm_lock().

When device_link_del() calls __device_link_del() (device_link_del() ->
device_link_put_kref() kref_put() -> __device_link_del()) it grabs the
device_pm_lock().

However, when device_link_drop_managed() calls __device_link_del()
(device_link_drop_managed() -> kref_put() -> __device_link_del()) it
doesn't grab device_pm_lock(). There's nothing special about managed
device-links that remove the need for grabbing device_pm_lock(). So, this
patch makes sure device_pm_lock() is always held when deleting managed
links.

And thanks to Stephen Boyd for helping me understand the lockdep splat.

Fixes: 843e600b8a2b ("driver core: Fix sleeping in invalid context during device link deletion")
Fixes: 515db266a9da ("driver core: Remove device link creation limitation")
[1] - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAA+hA=S4eAreb7vo69LAXSk2t5=DEKNxHaiY1wSpk4xTp9urLg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Reported-by: Dong Aisheng <dongas86@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx>
---

Rafael,

A bigger question I had is why we need to grab device_pm_lock() around
device_link_del() in the first place. I understand the need to grab it
during device_link_add() -- it's because we are checking the supplier is
in the dpm_list and because we are reordering devices on the dpm_list.

But during deletion, we don't need to do either one of those.  So, why
do we even need to grab the device_pm_lock() in the first place. The
device_links_write_lock() that we already grab before deleting a device
link seems like it'd be sufficient. If you agree we don't need to grab
device_pm_lock() during deletion, then I can change this patch to just
delete that locking.

-Saravana

 drivers/base/core.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c
index f6f620aa9408..de1935e21d97 100644
--- a/drivers/base/core.c
+++ b/drivers/base/core.c
@@ -766,8 +766,10 @@ static void __device_link_del(struct kref *kref)
 	if (link->flags & DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME)
 		pm_runtime_drop_link(link->consumer);
 
+	device_pm_lock();
 	list_del_rcu(&link->s_node);
 	list_del_rcu(&link->c_node);
+	device_pm_unlock();
 	device_unregister(&link->link_dev);
 }
 #else /* !CONFIG_SRCU */
@@ -781,8 +783,10 @@ static void __device_link_del(struct kref *kref)
 	if (link->flags & DL_FLAG_PM_RUNTIME)
 		pm_runtime_drop_link(link->consumer);
 
+	device_pm_lock();
 	list_del(&link->s_node);
 	list_del(&link->c_node);
+	device_pm_unlock();
 	device_unregister(&link->link_dev);
 }
 #endif /* !CONFIG_SRCU */
@@ -807,9 +811,7 @@ static void device_link_put_kref(struct device_link *link)
 void device_link_del(struct device_link *link)
 {
 	device_links_write_lock();
-	device_pm_lock();
 	device_link_put_kref(link);
-	device_pm_unlock();
 	device_links_write_unlock();
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(device_link_del);
@@ -830,7 +832,6 @@ void device_link_remove(void *consumer, struct device *supplier)
 		return;
 
 	device_links_write_lock();
-	device_pm_lock();
 
 	list_for_each_entry(link, &supplier->links.consumers, s_node) {
 		if (link->consumer == consumer) {
@@ -839,7 +840,6 @@ void device_link_remove(void *consumer, struct device *supplier)
 		}
 	}
 
-	device_pm_unlock();
 	device_links_write_unlock();
 }
 EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(device_link_remove);
-- 
2.28.0.402.g5ffc5be6b7-goog