The bm_work work item should be scheduled after holding fw_card reference
counting. At a commit 25feb1a96e21 ("firewire: core: use cleanup function
in bm_work"), I misinterpreted it as fw_card spinlock and inserted
lockdep_assert_hold() wrongly.

This commit removes the useless line.

Fixes: 25feb1a96e21 ("firewire: core: use cleanup function in bm_work")
Signed-off-by: Takashi Sakamoto <o-takashi@sakamocchi.jp>
---
 drivers/firewire/core-card.c | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/firewire/core-card.c b/drivers/firewire/core-card.c
index 474d8066e090..32cf6b3344cd 100644
--- a/drivers/firewire/core-card.c
+++ b/drivers/firewire/core-card.c
@@ -294,8 +294,6 @@ static void bm_work(struct work_struct *work)
 	int expected_gap_count, generation, grace;
 	bool do_reset = false;
 
-	lockdep_assert_held(&card->lock);
-
 	spin_lock_irq(&card->lock);
 
 	if (card->local_node == NULL) {
-- 
2.48.1

On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 07:13:11AM +0900, Takashi Sakamoto wrote:
> The bm_work work item should be scheduled after holding fw_card reference
> counting. At a commit 25feb1a96e21 ("firewire: core: use cleanup function
> in bm_work"), I misinterpreted it as fw_card spinlock and inserted
> lockdep_assert_hold() wrongly.
> 
> This commit removes the useless line.
> 
> Fixes: 25feb1a96e21 ("firewire: core: use cleanup function in bm_work")
> Signed-off-by: Takashi Sakamoto <o-takashi@sakamocchi.jp>
> ---
>  drivers/firewire/core-card.c | 2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

Applied to for-next branch.


Regards

Takashi Sakamoto