ARM: ux500:mach-ux500/cpuidle.c spinlock dis-matching

[zhanzhenbo@gmail.com (Steve zhan)]

Hi Daniel,Linus Walleij.
	Using MUTT resubmit this for 
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2013-January/139893.html

---
Steve

commit 99d0a05d163bd070eba7caab7e772206edbcbbc9
Author: steve zhan <zhanzhenbo@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon Jan 7 18:19:14 2013 +0800

    ARM: ux500: add spin_unlock(&master_lock).
    
    Add the missing spin_unlock statement to unlock
    master_lock when prcmu_gic_decouple() return TRUE
    
    Signed-off-by: steve zhan <zhanzhenbo@gmail.com>

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/cpuidle.c b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/cpuidle.c
index b54884bd..ce91493 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/cpuidle.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/cpuidle.c
@@ -40,8 +40,10 @@ static inline int ux500_enter_idle(struct cpuidle_device *dev,
 			goto wfi;
 
 		/* decouple the gic from the A9 cores */
-		if (prcmu_gic_decouple())
+		if (prcmu_gic_decouple()) {
+			spin_unlock(&master_lock);
 			goto out;
+		}
 
 		/* If an error occur, we will have to recouple the gic
 		 * manually */




2013/1/7 Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>:
> On 01/07/2013 06:50 AM, steve.zhan wrote:
>> Hi Daniel,
>>
>>     Happy new year, Thank you for reply.
>> Sorry for that i have refer the old patch email.
>> I have updated the patch, Pls check the URL:
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2012-December/138939.html
>> Now i am using gmail GUI tools to send mail, i will switch email tool
>> to MUTT to commit the other patchs in the future.
>
> Ok.
>
> Please do not introduce a new variable which is at the end pointless and
> add more complexity.
>
> You can simply remove the if statement for prcmu_gic_decouple(), or
> unlock if it fails.
>
> Thanks
>   -- Daniel
>
>> --------------
>> steve.zhan
>>
>> 2013/1/7, Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>:
>>> On 12/28/2012 08:06 AM, steve.zhan wrote:
>>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> Hi Steve,
>>>
>>> sorry I missed your email.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>        I think we must unlock the master spinlock even
>>>> prcmu_gic_decouple function now always return 0.
>>>>        Could you give some infos about this?
>>>
>>> I agree, that would be cleaner.
>>>
>>> AFAICS, your patch does not solve the problem because 'recouple' will be
>>> false if prcmu_gic_decouple fails, so the lock will never be release.
>>>
>>> That will be simpler to do:
>>>
>>> if (prcmu_gic_decouple()) {
>>>      spin_unlock(&master);
>>>      goto out;
>>> }
>>>
>>> no ?
>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/cpuidle.c
>>>> b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/cpuidle.c
>>>> index b54884bd..b0759ce 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-ux500/cpuidle.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-ux500/cpuidle.c
>>>> @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ static inline int ux500_enter_idle(struct cpuidle_device
>>>> *dev,
>>>>  {
>>>>         int this_cpu = smp_processor_id();
>>>>         bool recouple = false;
>>>> +       bool locked = false;
>>>>
>>>>         clockevents_notify(CLOCK_EVT_NOTIFY_BROADCAST_ENTER, &this_cpu);
>>>>
>>>> @@ -39,6 +40,8 @@ static inline int ux500_enter_idle(struct cpuidle_device
>>>> *dev,
>>>>                 if (!spin_trylock(&master_lock))
>>>>                         goto wfi;
>>>>
>>>> +               locked = true;
>>>> +
>>>>                 /* decouple the gic from the A9 cores */
>>>>                 if (prcmu_gic_decouple())
>>>>                         goto out;
>>>> @@ -76,7 +79,7 @@ static inline int ux500_enter_idle(struct cpuidle_device
>>>> *dev,
>>>>                 /* When we switch to retention, the prcmu is in charge
>>>>                  * of recoupling the gic automatically */
>>>>                 recouple = false;
>>>> -
>>>> +               locked = false;
>>>>                 spin_unlock(&master_lock);
>>>>         }
>>>>  wfi:
>>>> @@ -86,7 +89,8 @@ out:
>>>>
>>>>         if (recouple) {
>>>>                 prcmu_gic_recouple();
>>>> -               spin_unlock(&master_lock);
>>>> +               if (locked)
>>>> +                       spin_unlock(&master_lock);
>>>>         }
>>>>
>>>>         clockevents_notify(CLOCK_EVT_NOTIFY_BROADCAST_EXIT, &this_cpu);
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Steve Zhan
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ?? Open source software for ARM SoCs
>>>
>>> Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
>>> <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
>>> <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ?? Open source software for ARM SoCs
>
> Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
> <http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
> <http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
>