[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240212095722.GB388487@rigel>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 17:57:22 +0800
From: Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 23/24] gpio: remove the RW semaphore from the GPIO
device
On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 10:53:07AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 10, 2024 at 6:37 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 10:59:19AM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
> > >
> > > With all accesses to gdev->chip being protected with SRCU, we can now
> > > remove the RW-semaphore specific to the character device which
> > > fullfilled the same role up to this point.
> > >
> >
> > fulfilled
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
> > > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/gpio/gpiolib-cdev.c | 1 -
> > > drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 4 ----
> > > drivers/gpio/gpiolib.h | 5 -----
> > > 3 files changed, 10 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-cdev.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-cdev.c
> > > index ccdeed013f6b..9323b357df43 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-cdev.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-cdev.c
> > > @@ -24,7 +24,6 @@
> > > #include <linux/pinctrl/consumer.h>
> > > #include <linux/poll.h>
> > > #include <linux/rbtree.h>
> > > -#include <linux/rwsem.h>
> > > #include <linux/seq_file.h>
> > > #include <linux/spinlock.h>
> > > #include <linux/timekeeping.h>
> >
> > Shouldn't this be part of the rwsem -> srcu switch in the previous
> > patch?
> >
>
> That other patch was already huge. I figured this should be separate.
>
To be clear, I mean just this header removal, not the whole patch.
Cheers,
Kent.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists