[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221117140024.o77f5prewt5clgyh@pengutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2022 15:00:24 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] pwm: Reduce time the pwm_lock mutex is held in
pwmchip_add()
Hello Andy,
On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 10:11:32AM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 10:15:13PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > This simplifies error handling as the need for goto error handling goes
> > away and at the end of the function the code can be simplified as this
> > code isn't used in the error case any more.
>
> ...
>
> > + mutex_unlock(&pwm_lock);
> >
> > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF))
> > of_pwmchip_add(chip);
>
> Why calling this without a lock is not a problem? Commit message doesn't share
> a bit about this change.
Maybe add another paragraph at the end reading:
Now memory allocation and the call to of_pwmchip_add() are done without
holding the lock. Both don't access the data structures protected by
&pwm_lock.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists