[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHv-k_86z3MTYePPQcs5fWSqFeoGxt7UYG_b-SyZGQ7zVW-hSw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 20:38:21 +0530
From: Binoy Jayan <binoy.jayan@...aro.org>
To: Jack Wang <xjtuwjp@...il.com>
Cc: Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
Hal Rosenstock <hal.rosenstock@...il.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] IB/core: Replace semaphore sm_sem with completion
On 25 October 2016 at 18:13, Jack Wang <xjtuwjp@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi Binoy,
>
> snip
>>
>> port->ib_dev = device;
>> port->port_num = port_num;
>> - sema_init(&port->sm_sem, 1);
>> + init_completion(&port->sm_comp);
>> + complete(&port->sm_comp);
>
> Why complete here?
>
>> mutex_init(&port->file_mutex);
>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&port->file_list);
>>
>> --
> KR,
> Jinpu
Hi Jack,
ib_umad_sm_open() calls wait_for_completion_interruptible() which comes before
ib_umad_sm_close() that calls complete(). In the initial open() there
will not be
anybody to signal the completion, so the complete is called to mark
the initial state.
I am not sure if this is the right way to do it, though.
-Binoy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists