On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 12:57:16PM -0700, Keith Busch wrote:
> @@ -5488,9 +5488,10 @@ static void pci_bus_lock(struct pci_bus *bus)
>
> pci_dev_lock(bus->self);
> list_for_each_entry(dev, &bus->devices, bus_list) {
> - pci_dev_lock(dev);
> if (dev->subordinate)
> pci_bus_lock(dev->subordinate);
> + else
> + pci_dev_lock(dev);
> }
> }
>
> @@ -5502,7 +5503,8 @@ static void pci_bus_unlock(struct pci_bus *bus)
> list_for_each_entry(dev, &bus->devices, bus_list) {
> if (dev->subordinate)
> pci_bus_unlock(dev->subordinate);
> - pci_dev_unlock(dev);
> + else
> + pci_dev_unlock(dev);
> }
> pci_dev_unlock(bus->self);
> }
I realized pci_slot_lock() has the same problem. I wasn't able to test
that path from not having a pcie topology with a subordinate on the slot
device, but it follows the same pattern. Same thing with
pci_bus_trylock() for that matter, so I will make a new version.
