[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK=Wgbbz+2GGsgujiOGWbNoerogvvTkOvJUsY77mUmbKF-Mu-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2015 14:31:24 +0300
From: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
To: Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@...aro.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...ymobile.com>,
Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>,
"linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] hwspinlock: Introduce raw capability for hwspinlock_device
Hi Lina,
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 11:30 PM, Lina Iyer <lina.iyer@...aro.org> wrote:
> You are right, RAW capability is not lock specific. But we dont want to
> impose this on every lock in the bank either.
I'm not sure I'm following your concern here: drivers still need to
explicitly indicate RAW in order for this to kick in, so this lenient
approach is not being imposed on them.
Your original patch allowed every driver on all platforms to disable
the sw spinlock mechanism. What I'm merely suggesting is that the
underlying platform-specific driver should first allow this before it
is being used, as some vendors prohibit this completely.
Let's not make this more complicated than needed, so please add the
hwcaps member to hwspinlock_device instead of to hwspinlock struct. We
could always change this later if it proves to be insufficient.
Thanks,
Ohad.
--
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