On Thu, 11 Dec 2025 10:12:19 +0000, Loktionov, Aleksandr wrote: >> Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net v2 2/2] ixgbe: don't >> initialize aci lock in ixgbe_recovery_probe() >> >> hw->aci.lock is already initialized in ixgbe_sw_init(), so >> ixgbe_recovery_probe() doesn't need to initialize the lock. This >You claim that ixgbe_sw_init() initializes hw->aci.lock but don't provide >evidence(s). >Can you?
Hi Alex, thank you for reviewing! Yeah, I claim that because currently ixgbe_recovery_probe() is only called from ixgbe_probe(), and this is called after ixgbe_sw_init(). Also I don't expect ixgbe_recovery_probe() would be called from other contexts in the future. We confirmed the that double initialization would occur in the context[1], but are there any recommended solutions we can adopt? I understand that double initialization doesn't always introduce realistic issue because it would be problematic only when reinialization is done while the lock is held, but it's a fact that actually unnecessary initialization is done in ixgbe_recovery_probe(). I believe this change would be right, but maybe we should ask Jedrzej for the intention of mutex_init() in ixgbe_recovery_probe(), and possibility that ixgbe_recovery_probe() would be called from any other contexts. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
