Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 26 Jun 2023 14:13:45 +0300
From:   "andy@kernel.org" <andy@kernel.org>
To:     YE Chengfeng <cyeaa@connect.ust.hk>
Cc:     Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>,
        "linus.walleij@linaro.org" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        "brgl@bgdev.pl" <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
        "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: gpiolib-cdev: Fix potential &lr->wait.lock
 deadlock issue
Message-ID: <ZJly6YWZsI3ItNRM@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <TYCP286MB1188B6A0379F7928C63288DF8A21A@TYCP286MB1188.JPNP286.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <ZJk87rWsDj7pWJIP@sol>
 <3C977550-9829-4A6F-A5CA-04C938D77693@connect.ust.hk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3C977550-9829-4A6F-A5CA-04C938D77693@connect.ust.hk>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 10:38:53AM +0000, YE Chengfeng wrote:
> > 1) do you have any warning/oops/etc to show the real case?
> > 2) shouldn't we annotate with respective lockdep asserts this code?
> The bugs were detected by an experimental static code analyzer that I am 
> implementing. I don't have input to trigger it, so I manually review the 
> report and then send the ones I believe to be true to you. Perhaps next 
> time I should mention this while sending the patch.

This you have to mention in the submission.
https://docs.kernel.org/process/researcher-guidelines.html

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko