> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kubalewski, Arkadiusz <[email protected]>
> Sent: Monday, June 8, 2026 6:51 PM
> To: Nitka, Grzegorz <[email protected]>; [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Oros, Petr
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected];
> Kitszel, Przemyslaw <[email protected]>; Nguyen, Anthony L
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Vecera,
> Ivan <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v14 net-next 03/13] dpll: fix stale iteration in
> dpll_pin_on_pin_unregister()
>
> >From: Nitka, Grzegorz <[email protected]>
> >Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2026 8:31 PM
> >
> >Neither parent->dpll_refs nor pin->dpll_refs on its own is a correct
> >iteration target at unregister time:
> >
> > - pin->dpll_refs includes DPLLs the child was registered against
> > via a different parent or directly; blind unregister WARNs on
> > the cookie miss in dpll_xa_ref_pin_del().
> > - parent->dpll_refs reflects the parent's current attachments, not
> > those at child-register time. Another driver may have (un)reg'd
> > the parent against additional DPLLs in the meantime, so we miss
> > registrations that exist and visit DPLLs that have none.
> >
> >Walk pin->dpll_refs and use dpll_pin_registration_find() to filter
> >to entries whose cookie is this parent. Symmetric with
> >dpll_pin_on_pin_register(), correct under any subsequent change to
> >parent->dpll_refs.
> >
> >Fixes: 9431063ad323 ("dpll: core: Add DPLL framework base functions")
> >Signed-off-by: Grzegorz Nitka <[email protected]>
> >---
> > drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c | 7 ++++++-
> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> >index 6dc7e93ece75..cea7e2be2cbc 100644
> >--- a/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> >+++ b/drivers/dpll/dpll_core.c
> >@@ -1031,14 +1031,19 @@
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dpll_pin_on_pin_register);
> > void dpll_pin_on_pin_unregister(struct dpll_pin *parent, struct dpll_pin
> >*pin,
> > const struct dpll_pin_ops *ops, void *priv)
> > {
> >+ struct dpll_pin_registration *reg;
> > struct dpll_pin_ref *ref;
> > unsigned long i;
> >
> > mutex_lock(&dpll_lock);
> > dpll_pin_delete_ntf(pin);
>
> Hey Grzegorz,
>
> This line is redundant after 7/13?
>
Hi Arek,
Yes, in general.
The reason for which I put it as separate patches (applies to all new 'Fixes'
patches) is:
- to identify atomic changes and
- to make it easy to backport to other branches ('old' ones) if the call is to
backport it
Regards
Grzegorz
> > dpll_xa_ref_pin_del(&pin->parent_refs, parent, ops, priv, pin);
> >- xa_for_each(&pin->dpll_refs, i, ref)
> >+ xa_for_each(&pin->dpll_refs, i, ref) {
> >+ reg = dpll_pin_registration_find(ref, ops, priv, parent);
> >+ if (!reg)
> >+ continue;
> > __dpll_pin_unregister(ref->dpll, pin, ops, priv, parent);
> >+ }
> > mutex_unlock(&dpll_lock);
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dpll_pin_on_pin_unregister);
> >--
> >2.39.3
