On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:15:19 +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 09:08:25 +0100, > Amadeusz SX2awiX4ski wrote: > > > > On 3/22/2022 6:07 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > Like the previous fixes to hw_params and hw_free ioctl races, we need > > > to paper over the concurrent prepare ioctl calls against hw_params and > > > hw_free, too. > > > > > > This patch implements the locking with the existing > > > runtime->buffer_mutex for prepare ioctls. Unlike the previous case > > > for snd_pcm_hw_hw_params() and snd_pcm_hw_free(), snd_pcm_prepare() is > > > performed to the linked streams, hence the lock can't be applied > > > simply on the top. For tracking the lock in each linked substream, we > > > modify snd_pcm_action_group() slightly and apply the buffer_mutex for > > > the case stream_lock=false (formerly there was no lock applied) > > > there. > > > > > > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > sound/core/pcm_native.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++-------------- > > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/sound/core/pcm_native.c b/sound/core/pcm_native.c > > > index 266895374b83..0e4fbf5fd87b 100644 > > > --- a/sound/core/pcm_native.c > > > +++ b/sound/core/pcm_native.c > > > @@ -1190,15 +1190,17 @@ struct action_ops { > > > static int snd_pcm_action_group(const struct action_ops *ops, > > > struct snd_pcm_substream *substream, > > > snd_pcm_state_t state, > > > - bool do_lock) > > > + bool stream_lock) > > > { > > > struct snd_pcm_substream *s = NULL; > > > struct snd_pcm_substream *s1; > > > int res = 0, depth = 1; > > > snd_pcm_group_for_each_entry(s, substream) { > > > - if (do_lock && s != substream) { > > > - if (s->pcm->nonatomic) > > > + if (s != substream) { > > > + if (!stream_lock) > > > + mutex_lock_nested(&s->runtime->buffer_mutex, depth); > > > + else if (s->pcm->nonatomic) > > > mutex_lock_nested(&s->self_group.mutex, depth); > > > else > > > spin_lock_nested(&s->self_group.lock, depth); > > > > Maybe > > if (!stream_lock) > > mutex_lock_nested(&s->runtime->buffer_mutex, depth); > > else > > snd_pcm_group_lock(&s->self_group, s->pcm->nonatomic); > > ? > > No, it must be nested locks with the given subclass. FWIW, the reason is that lockdep would complain otherwise as if it were a deadlock. That is, this is a workaround for avoiding false lockdep warnings. Takashi