From 9db5397d87fc212863d4750c85ff8b9a6ed42b95 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Daniel Baumann Date: Sat, 4 May 2024 12:10:17 +0200 Subject: Adding upstream version 6.1.82. Signed-off-by: Daniel Baumann --- drivers/base/core.c | 15 +++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) (limited to 'drivers/base/core.c') diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c index af90bfb0c..3078f44dc 100644 --- a/drivers/base/core.c +++ b/drivers/base/core.c @@ -337,10 +337,12 @@ static bool device_is_ancestor(struct device *dev, struct device *target) return false; } +#define DL_MARKER_FLAGS (DL_FLAG_INFERRED | \ + DL_FLAG_CYCLE | \ + DL_FLAG_MANAGED) static inline bool device_link_flag_is_sync_state_only(u32 flags) { - return (flags & ~(DL_FLAG_INFERRED | DL_FLAG_CYCLE)) == - (DL_FLAG_SYNC_STATE_ONLY | DL_FLAG_MANAGED); + return (flags & ~DL_MARKER_FLAGS) == DL_FLAG_SYNC_STATE_ONLY; } /** @@ -2054,9 +2056,14 @@ static int fw_devlink_create_devlink(struct device *con, /* * SYNC_STATE_ONLY device links don't block probing and supports cycles. - * So cycle detection isn't necessary and shouldn't be done. + * So, one might expect that cycle detection isn't necessary for them. + * However, if the device link was marked as SYNC_STATE_ONLY because + * it's part of a cycle, then we still need to do cycle detection. This + * is because the consumer and supplier might be part of multiple cycles + * and we need to detect all those cycles. */ - if (!(flags & DL_FLAG_SYNC_STATE_ONLY)) { + if (!device_link_flag_is_sync_state_only(flags) || + flags & DL_FLAG_CYCLE) { device_links_write_lock(); if (__fw_devlink_relax_cycles(con, sup_handle)) { __fwnode_link_cycle(link); -- cgit v1.2.3