[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110831160105.27fe89fd@v0nbox>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 16:01:05 -0400
From: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>
To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>, x86@...nel.org,
Jonas Fonseca <jonas.fonseca@...oirfairelinux.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [v2 3/4] platform: (TS-5500) add LED support
On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:04:00 -0700,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> On 08/30/2011 02:56 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
> >>
> > I wrote the led_set function like:
> >
> > static void ts5500_led_set(struct led_classdev *led_cdev,
> > enum led_brightness value)
> > {
> > struct ts5500_led *led = container_of(led_cdev,
> > struct ts5500_led,
> > cdev);
> > mutex_lock(&led->lock);
> > led->new_brightness = (value == LED_OFF) ? LED_OFF :
> > LED_FULL; outb(value, led->ioaddr);
> > mutex_unlock(&led->lock);
> > }
> >
> > I guess the wrong value could be read if we get preempted just
> > before the outb() call, am I wrong?
> >
>
> And what happens if we do?
>
> P.S. Your canonicalization of the value doesn't extend to outb().
>
> -hpa
In fact the new_brightness field wasn't necessary in this driver, so I
removed it and now the function only contains the outb() call. Thanks.
Vivien
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists