[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPcyv4h1HfFFD8f3attOhyR+bL_B_p7HRP5KXm+xjKc2nz524g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 17:44:05 -0800
From: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To: alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-nvdimm <linux-nvdimm@...ts.01.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux-pm mailing list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
jiangshanlai@...il.com, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
zwisler@...nel.org, Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
bvanassche@....org
Subject: Re: [driver-core PATCH v6 3/9] device core: Consolidate locking and
unlocking of parent and device
On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 10:06 AM Alexander Duyck
<alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> Try to consolidate all of the locking and unlocking of both the parent and
> device when attaching or removing a driver from a given device.
>
> To do that I first consolidated the lock pattern into two functions
> __device_driver_lock and __device_driver_unlock. After doing that I then
> created functions specific to attaching and detaching the driver while
> acquiring these locks. By doing this I was able to reduce the number of
> spots where we touch need_parent_lock from 12 down to 4.
>
> Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
> Reviewed-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...ux.intel.com>
I was going to complain about the new addition of "This function" in
the kernel-doc, but there are other occurrences in the file so that
can wait for some future cleanup.
I missed the __device_driver_unlock comment that Jane caught.
With that fixed up.
Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists