From: Darren Hart <dvhart@infradead.org>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Cc: "Mario Limonciello" <Mario.Limonciello@dell.com>,
"Pali Rohár" <pali.rohar@gmail.com>,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Platform Driver" <platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: dell-laptop: Guard SMBIOS calls with a mutex
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 10:54:48 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180131185448.GE8676@fury> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHp75Vd4N2DNpnFgE-k85Kz7_sZ=SH=-L8sagLkFx=WMj8xW=Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 05:39:58PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 5:35 PM, <Mario.Limonciello@dell.com> wrote:
>
> >> > dell_set_arguments(0x2, 0, 0, 0);
> >> > ret = dell_send_request(CLASS_INFO, SELECT_RFKILL);
> >>
> >> Hi! I'm looking at this code, and do we need shared global buffer with
> >> mutex protection at all? Is not buffer allocated on stack enough?
> >
> > Oh you mean rather than create buffer mutex to just remove global
> > buffer and allocate in each function? That seems like a workable
> > approach to me too.
> >
> > I'm fine with either way.
> >
> > Andy or Darren, what's your preference in this area?
>
> It reminds me USB stuff where buffer for transfer is allocated on heap
> before performing communication.
> So, it looks similar to some extent and I have no objection on that
> kind of approach.
Late to the party it seems, but FWIW:
I don't see a significant advantage of a global buffer. It doesn't *need* to be
global, and the locking just adds complexity. The heap solution seems much
preferable to me.
--
Darren Hart
VMware Open Source Technology Center
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-31 18:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-01-29 23:15 [PATCH] platform/x86: dell-laptop: Guard SMBIOS calls with a mutex Mario Limonciello
2018-01-30 11:02 ` Pali Rohár
2018-01-30 15:35 ` Mario.Limonciello
2018-01-30 15:35 ` Mario.Limonciello
2018-01-30 15:39 ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-01-31 18:54 ` Darren Hart [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180131185448.GE8676@fury \
--to=dvhart@infradead.org \
--cc=Mario.Limonciello@dell.com \
--cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pali.rohar@gmail.com \
--cc=platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.