[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2025061623-ammonium-outskirts-e89e@gregkh>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2025 16:15:06 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Andrei Kuchynski <akuchynski@...omium.org>
Cc: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <lumag@...nel.org>,
Abhishek Pandit-Subedi <abhishekpandit@...omium.org>,
Jameson Thies <jthies@...gle.com>,
Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org>,
Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
Pooja Katiyar <pooja.katiyar@...el.com>,
Badhri Jagan Sridharan <badhri@...gle.com>,
RD Babiera <rdbabiera@...gle.com>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] Revert "usb: typec: displayport: Receive DP Status
Update NAK request exit dp altmode"
On Mon, Jun 16, 2025 at 01:31:43PM +0000, Andrei Kuchynski wrote:
> This reverts commit b4b38ffb38c91afd4dc387608db26f6fc34ed40b.
>
> The commit introduced a deadlock with the cros_ec_typec driver.
> The deadlock occurs due to a recursive lock acquisition of
> `cros_typec_altmode_work::mutex`.
> The call chain is as follows:
> 1. cros_typec_altmode_work() acquires the mutex
> 2. typec_altmode_vdm() -> dp_altmode_vdm() ->
> 3. typec_altmode_exit() -> cros_typec_altmode_exit()
> 4. cros_typec_altmode_exit() attempts to acquire the mutex again
>
> This revert is considered safe as no other known driver sends back
> DP_CMD_STATUS_UPDATE command with the NAK flag.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrei Kuchynski <akuchynski@...omium.org>
> ---
> drivers/usb/typec/altmodes/displayport.c | 4 ----
> 1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
Why isn't this being sent as a separate patch for 6.16-final? And why
not put a fixes: line?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists