[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51187376.2060106@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 13:28:38 +0900
From: Alex Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: Fix locking on gpio debugfs files
On 02/09/2013 07:34 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
> The debugfs files really need to hold the gpiolib spinlock before
> accessing the list. Otherwise chip addition/removal will cause an oops.
>
> Cc: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Tested-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
Just wondering: if we manage to change this spinlock into a mutex in the
future, wouldn't it be better to acquire it only once in
gpiolib_seq_start() and release it in gpiolib_seq_stop()?
Even though the protection introduced by this patch definitely improves
the situation, it seems to me that chips could still be removed while
being displayed by gpiolib_seq_show().
Thanks,
Alex.
--
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