[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250416095645.2027695-2-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 12:55:09 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/8] gpiolib: Make taking gpio_lookup_lock consistent
There are two ways to take a lock: plain call to the mutex_lock()
or using guard()() / scoped_guard(). The driver inconsistently uses
both. Make taking gpio_lookup_lock consistent.
Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
---
drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 8 ++------
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
index b8993d2d31e1..7d9cc1a9c535 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
@@ -4363,12 +4363,10 @@ void gpiod_add_lookup_tables(struct gpiod_lookup_table **tables, size_t n)
{
unsigned int i;
- mutex_lock(&gpio_lookup_lock);
+ guard(mutex)(&gpio_lookup_lock);
for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
list_add_tail(&tables[i]->list, &gpio_lookup_list);
-
- mutex_unlock(&gpio_lookup_lock);
}
/**
@@ -4427,11 +4425,9 @@ void gpiod_remove_lookup_table(struct gpiod_lookup_table *table)
if (!table)
return;
- mutex_lock(&gpio_lookup_lock);
+ guard(mutex)(&gpio_lookup_lock);
list_del(&table->list);
-
- mutex_unlock(&gpio_lookup_lock);
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(gpiod_remove_lookup_table);
--
2.47.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists