[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1949452.ECF46Ag4iX@pc-42>
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 10:10:56 +0200
From: Jérôme Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@...abs.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mohamed Dawod <mhm.dawod@...il.com>,
kernelnewbies@...nelnewbies.org
Subject: Re: [staging-testing] drivers/staging/wfx/hif_tx.c
On Wednesday 10 June 2020 08:53:13 CEST Mohamed Dawod wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I read this point in staging/wfx/TODO file
>
> - In wfx_cmd_send(), "async" allow to send command without waiting the reply.
> It may help in some situation, but it is not yet used. In add, it may cause
> some trouble:
> https://lore.kernel.org/driverdev-devel/alpine.DEB.2.21.1910041317381.2992@hadrien/
> So, fix it (by replacing the mutex with a semaphore) or drop it.
>
> I think that this issue has already been fixed in hif_shutdown() function, hasn't it ?
Indeed, when I wrote the TODO file, the function hif_shutdown() didn't
exist yet.
> I have another question. How can (replacing the mutex with a semaphore) solve the problem?
My understanding is that a mutex aims to be acquired and released from the
same context. In some specific usages (RT-mutex? lock proving?), acquire
mutex from a context and release it from another can produce some errors.
In contrary a boolean semaphore does not have this restriction.
(can anyone confirm that?)
--
Jérôme Pouiller
Powered by blists - more mailing lists