[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <158775291872.135303.5673866534956446786@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2020 11:28:38 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To: Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com
Cc: evgreen@...omium.org, mka@...omium.org, mkshah@...eaurora.org,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/5] soc: qcom: rpmh-rsc: Simplify locking by eliminating the per-TCS lock
Quoting Stephen Boyd (2020-04-24 11:06:06)
> Quoting Douglas Anderson (2020-04-24 09:46:56)
> > @@ -581,24 +575,19 @@ static int tcs_write(struct rsc_drv *drv, const struct tcs_request *msg)
> > + ret = find_free_tcs(tcs);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + goto unlock;
> > + tcs_id = ret;
>
> Sorry, missed this. We should keep the tcs_id = find_free_tcs() thing
> and then assign ret to it on failure. Otherwise the return value of this
> function is -EBUSY or the tcs_id number instead of -EBUSY or 0.
>
Ah I see that ret is only returned on error. Nevermind that comment. I
should make that coffee this morning...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists