[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 11:25:28 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regmap: allow to disable all locking mechanisms
On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 01:12:05PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2017 at 5:14 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:
> >>> +static void regmap_lock_unlock_empty(void *__map)
> >> ..._none()?
> > Too late, Mark already applied it.
> Ah, Mark always works at speed of light!
An incremental patch is always possible.
> >> Why not to introduce positive switch, namely
> >> bool mutex_lock; // choose better name
> >> and assign ..._none() by default?
> > Because we don't want to break all the existing regmaps, if map->lock
> > or map->unlock is empty, regmap core decides internally whether to use
> > a mutex or a spinlock.
> Good point.
> So, it means the options like: nomutex (false — mutex is in use) or
> nolock (true — disable locking).
> From those the latter looks better to me and IIUC you went that way.
Yup.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists