From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8448E5650E9; Tue, 8 Sep 2026 15:40:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788882012; cv=none; b=BnanG2C7RLACLO1x5fpmVaJn+IzoXXi8bDUHwckfsVpz8S3na91rzkpfEahYOpSdPcWGdAoMDAGR9t8svY06b3tboMD6YmHHEkNAmE4DsW0lj0fYgInE3sOgWRwVv6/6avIWuRH1ldcmLLtj8PGYgM4fW87YKAqMy+V+wcTNRX8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788882012; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4E/QUa1lJLzFAlCV6vPDzrRQV3T6EKul1f35Q4OSPzM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=cPHL3JJUnPFvperNcwXdW9Qga1peYP37cUKEJQlqCAovMArjo++in54LtQ3R739H0d5/QTH7jrdSMvntLI/h/u048QXta6ee4Tzc+nsaRUrOUxmVk5dp028ZhfQGoOiWbNGnDhH1+3USJS/YHbmNCEr1puqmTGs4e1aqZ1Kgt2Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=ZA4cJHzC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="ZA4cJHzC" Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C46411476; Tue, 8 Sep 2026 08:39:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pluto (usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4E77E3F7B4; Tue, 8 Sep 2026 08:39:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1788882000; bh=4E/QUa1lJLzFAlCV6vPDzrRQV3T6EKul1f35Q4OSPzM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=ZA4cJHzCorXj5MAXtAIs8Y/Mjeznm2KVYPJT22y7BscOnKzAaiMvSSjCzPi8mudo6 YqCCG/El4TCTvkHtCH/UMNFji8/tQXhsO4eM/O+smMCE2zjxGPGKP7rYUHe4Ev4ovv Ja7+JOpK1F6Rk8/ujCt64QN3el//HDA+d0RPkx54= Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 16:39:51 +0100 From: Cristian Marussi To: rolanddreier@rivian.com Cc: Sudeep Holla , Cristian Marussi , arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Couple of SCMI race fixes Message-ID: References: <20260814-scmi-async-done-race-v1-0-335b163d77ee@rivian.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260814-scmi-async-done-race-v1-0-335b163d77ee@rivian.com> On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 08:15:32PM +0000, Roland Dreier via B4 Relay wrote: > Noticed a couple of races in SCMI code around delayed responses that > time out. These are probably nearly impossible to hit in practice but > the fixes are pretty straightforward and it seems worth having the > code be sound. Hi, apologies for the delay in this reviews... Nice hardening work, Sashiko complains about a few unrelated things (of course :P), there is only probably a good point around the update of DEBUG_COUNTERS that you added https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260814-scmi-async-done-race-v1-0-335b163d77ee%40rivian.com "Will this new counter actually increment for timed-out responses, or will it be blocked by earlier validation logic?" I mean please consider if you can improve the patch only regarding the DEBUG_COUNTER update (probably moving the update where async_done is now set to NULL is enough...) Beside this, look good to me and in my testing everything was fine. Thanks Cristian