Re: [PATCH v1] driver core: Reject pointless SYNC_STATE_ONLY device links

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 2:51 AM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> SYNC_STATE_ONLY device links intentionally allow cycles because cyclic
> sync_state() dependencies are valid and necessary.
>
> However a SYNC_STATE_ONLY device link where the consumer and the supplier
> are the same device is pointless because the device link would be deleted
> as soon as the device probes (because it's also the consumer) and won't
> affect when the sync_state() callback is called. It's a waste of CPU cycles
> and memory to create this device link. So reject any attempts to create
> such a device link.
>
> Fixes: 05ef983e0d65 ("driver core: Add device link support for SYNC_STATE_ONLY flag")
> Reported-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/base/core.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c
> index 15986cc2fe5e..eed27933ac4d 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/core.c
> @@ -716,7 +716,7 @@ struct device_link *device_link_add(struct device *consumer,
>          * SYNC_STATE_ONLY link, we don't check for reverse dependencies
>          * because it only affects sync_state() callbacks.
>          */
> -       if (!device_pm_initialized(supplier)
> +       if (!device_pm_initialized(supplier) || consumer == supplier

Why do we need to get all the way down to here in order to return NULL
in the consumer == supplier case?

IMO this should be checked at the beginning along with !consumer and !supplier.

>             || (!(flags & DL_FLAG_SYNC_STATE_ONLY) &&
>                   device_is_dependent(consumer, supplier))) {
>                 link = NULL;
> --
> 2.33.0.685.g46640cef36-goog
>