[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAG0J990rqDdG5WdOrVGqZ9tFgJmnmP18S=c6o9JNygTLHS6=g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 16:22:31 +0100
From: James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@...com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
Anmar Oueja <anmar.oueja@...aro.org>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Laurent Meunier <laurent.meunier@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] pinctrl: move subsystem mutex to pinctrl_dev struct
On 26 April 2013 16:08, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com> wrote:
> @@ -608,7 +610,7 @@ static int pinconf_dbg_config_print(struct seq_file *s, void *d)
> bool found = false;
> unsigned long config;
>
> - mutex_lock(&pinctrl_mutex);
> + mutex_lock(&pctldev->mutex);
>
> /* Parse the pinctrl map and look for the elected pin/state */
> for_each_maps(maps_node, i, map) {
This change causes an oops on v3.10-rc2 when you read pinconf-config
because pctldev is initialised to NULL and not set until inside the
loop. I considered initialising pctldev to s->private, but I'm
concerned that if pctldev is altered in the loop it could end up
unlocking a different mutex to the one it locked. If this debugfs file
isn't meant to be specific to a pinctrl device should it be in the
root pinctrl directory instead of in each pinctrl device's directory?
Cheers
James
--
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