The scsi_block_reqs_cnt increased in ufshcd_hold() is supposed to be
decreased back in ufshcd_ungate_work() in a paired way. However, if
specific ufshcd_hold/release sequences are met, it is possible that
scsi_block_reqs_cnt is increased twice but only one ungate work is
queued. To make sure scsi_block_reqs_cnt is handled by ufshcd_hold() and
ufshcd_ungate_work() in a paired way, increase it only if queue_work()
returns true.

Signed-off-by: Can Guo <c...@codeaurora.org>
---
 drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
index 9ddfd13..4a34f2a 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/ufs/ufshcd.c
@@ -1611,12 +1611,12 @@ int ufshcd_hold(struct ufs_hba *hba, bool async)
                 */
                /* fallthrough */
        case CLKS_OFF:
-               ufshcd_scsi_block_requests(hba);
                hba->clk_gating.state = REQ_CLKS_ON;
                trace_ufshcd_clk_gating(dev_name(hba->dev),
                                        hba->clk_gating.state);
-               queue_work(hba->clk_gating.clk_gating_workq,
-                          &hba->clk_gating.ungate_work);
+               if (queue_work(hba->clk_gating.clk_gating_workq,
+                              &hba->clk_gating.ungate_work))
+                       ufshcd_scsi_block_requests(hba);
                /*
                 * fall through to check if we should wait for this
                 * work to be done or not.
-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux 
Foundation Collaborative Project.

Reply via email to