[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <519E38ED.7090202@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 09:42:37 -0600
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
To: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
CC: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Davide Ciminaghi <ciminaghi@...dd.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] regmap: Make regmap-mmio usable from different contexts
On 05/23/2013 07:06 AM, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> regmap-mmio uses a spinlock with spin_lock() and spin_unlock() for locking.
> Which means in order to avoid race conditions the lock always needs to be taken
> from the same context.
I'm not really sure what this means. I assume contexts are
atomic-vs-nonatomic? If so, spinlocks should work fine for this, right?
I guess the core of the issue is that you want to replace spin_lock()
with spin_lock_irqsave(). I'd like to see that explicitly described in
the commit description, if that is the core aspect of this change.
Re: the other comments about the API change: I think this can be done
non-invasively:
static void regmap_lock_spinlock(void *__map)
{
struct regmap *map = __map;
unsigned long local_flags;
spin_lock_irqsave(&map->spinlock, local_flags);
/*
* Here, we have the lock locked, so we own the flags,
* and can write to them.
*/
map->spinlock_flags = local_flags;
}
static void regmap_unlock_spinlock(void *__map, unsigned long *flags)
{
struct regmap *map = __map;
spin_unlock_irqrestore(&map->spinlock, map->spinlock_flags);
}
... and obviously add a spinlock_flags field to struct regmap (perhaps
start unioning the mutex and spinlock data fields there if you want to
save space).
--
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