[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdZD5EurbTRyUg7AWRZqVQ-6rmUQDUmVVCFU3r0Y1bwnVg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 13:20:46 +0100
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Alexandre TORGUE <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] pinctrl: stm32: protect configuration registers with
a hwspinlock
On Tue, Nov 13, 2018 at 10:51 AM Benjamin Gaignard
<benjamin.gaignard@...aro.org> wrote:
> If a hwspinlock if defined in device tree use it to protect
> configuration registers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Benjamin Gaignard <benjamin.gaignard@...com>
Patch applied with Alex' ACK.
Out of curiosity: what is it protecting against?
I would guess simultaneous access from another CPU
but the commit doesn't say.
Simultaneous access from two CPUs makes it extra important
that all register access is read-modify-write, so I'd have a second
check over the code to make sure this is the case.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists