[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51A5DEDC.4040606@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 29 May 2013 16:26:28 +0530
From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>, Dan Williams <djbw@...com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/12] tegra20-apb-dma: remove useless use of lock
On Monday 27 May 2013 05:44 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> Accordingly to dma_cookie_status() description locking is not required.
>
I think we need lock here:
From isr handler, we call dma_cookie_complete() which is in
spin-locked. This function updates tx->chan->completed_cookie = tx->cookie;
In tegra_dma_tx_status(), we check for dma_cookie_status() which access
the chan->completed_cookie; and it decides status based on this
As the access of chan->completed_cookie are from different context, we
need this locking.
But did not get why it is documented as locking is not require if shared
variable is getting changed/access from different context simultaneously.
--
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