linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] staging: sound: Adjust mutex unlock order

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <878qko8hfl.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2025 14:10:38 +0200
From: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
To: Erick Karanja <karanja99erick@...il.com>
Cc: perex@...ex.cz,
	tiwai@...e.com,
	linux-sound@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	julia.lawall@...ia.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: sound: Adjust mutex unlock order

On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 10:18:04 +0200,
Erick Karanja wrote:
> 
> The mutexes qdev_mutex and chip->mutex are acquired in that order
> throughout the driver. To preserve proper lock hierarchy and avoid
> potential deadlocks, they must be released in the reverse
> order of acquisition.
> 
> This change reorders the unlock sequence to first release chip->mutex
> followed by qdev_mutex, ensuring consistency with the locking pattern.
> 
> changes since v1:
>    - Applied the unlock reordering in other functions with this pattern.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Erick Karanja <karanja99erick@...il.com>

The code change looks good, but could you resubmit with the proper
subject prefix (e.g. "ALSA: usb: qcom:"), and with a Fixes tag?


thanks,

Takashi