[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150312204902.GA14659@qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2015 15:49:02 -0500
From: Andy Gross <agross@...eaurora.org>
To: Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@...aro.org>
Cc: bjorn.andersson@...ymobile.com, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
jhugo@...eaurora.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Lock 7 is cpuidle specific, use non-generic value for
locking
On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 01:38:28PM -0600, Lina Iyer wrote:
<snip>
> static int qcom_hwspinlock_trylock(struct hwspinlock *lock)
> {
> struct regmap_field *field = lock->priv;
> u32 lock_owner;
> int ret;
> + u32 proc_id;
>
> - ret = regmap_field_write(field, QCOM_MUTEX_APPS_PROC_ID);
> + proc_id = hwspin_lock_get_id(lock) == QCOM_CPUIDLE_LOCK ?
> + QCOM_MUTEX_CPUIDLE_OFFSET + smp_processor_id():
> + QCOM_MUTEX_APPS_PROC_ID;
> +
> + ret = regmap_field_write(field, proc_id);
I think I'd rather have a qcom specific function and EXPORT_SYMBOL that to deal
with this special case.
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> @@ -42,7 +49,7 @@ static int qcom_hwspinlock_trylock(struct hwspinlock *lock)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - return lock_owner == QCOM_MUTEX_APPS_PROC_ID;
> + return lock_owner == proc_id;
> }
>
> static void qcom_hwspinlock_unlock(struct hwspinlock *lock)
> --
> 2.1.0
>
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
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