[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <226381209.31782.1696362327615.JavaMail.zimbra@nod.at>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2023 21:45:27 +0200 (CEST)
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
Cc: Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
linux-mtd <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] mtd: ubi: attach MTD partition from device-tree
----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c b/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
> index e0618bbde3613..99b5f502c9dbc 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/ubi/block.c
> @@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ int ubiblock_remove(struct ubi_volume_info *vi, bool force)
> }
>
> /* Found a device, let's lock it so we can check if it's busy */
> - mutex_lock(&dev->dev_mutex);
> + mutex_lock_nested(&dev->dev_mutex, SINGLE_DEPTH_NESTING);
The usage of mutex_lock_nested() in this patch looks fishy.
Can you please elaborate a bit more why all these mutexes can be taken twice?
(Any why not more often).
Thanks,
//richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists