[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131202002444.GA22418@teo>
Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 16:24:44 -0800
From: Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org>
To: Michael Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com>
Cc: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
freemangordon@....bg, aaro.koskinen@....fi, pavel@....cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] bq2415x_charger: Use power_supply notifier for
automode
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 01:02:40AM +0100, Michael Trimarchi wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 11:37 PM, Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 08:16:34PM +0100, Michael Trimarchi wrote:
> > ...
> >> >> So you can read this value without any type of synchronization
> >> >> with the power_supply_core
> >> >> and sysfs implementation?
> > ...
> >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/2013-January/025206.html
> >>
> >> I found and equivalent scenario that I was trying to said
> >
> > That's a good question, actually. Even though in Pali's case the notifier
> > is atomic (so that we are pretty confident that the object won't be
> > unregistered), there is still a possiblity of a dead lock, for example. So
>
> So if the get_property is a sleeping function it will be a deadlock. Right?
All kind of bad things might happen, yes. But before that I would expect a
bunch of warnings from might_sleep() stuff.
I would recommend to test the patches using preempt/smp kernels + various
DEBUG_ kernel options set.
Thanks,
Anton
--
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