kernelnewbies.kernelnewbies.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: mhornung.linux@gmail.com (mhornung.linux at gmail.com)
To: kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.org
Subject: drivers: staging: most: Locking question
Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 20:14:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160718181446.GA1650@googlemail.com> (raw)

Hello,

I have some questions about the locking techniques used inside
file drivers/staging/most/hdm-usb/hdm_usb.c.

The one and only call to function free_anchored_buffers is locked by a Mutex:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    	...
        mutex_lock(&mdev->io_mutex);
	free_anchored_buffers(mdev, channel);
	if (mdev->padding_active[channel])
		mdev->padding_active[channel] = false;

        if (mdev->conf[channel].data_type == MOST_CH_ASYNC) {
	        del_timer_sync(&mdev->link_stat_timer);
		cancel_work_sync(&mdev->poll_work_obj);
	}
	mutex_unlock(&mdev->io_mutex);
	...						
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then, inside function free_anchored_buffers, they use a (from my point of view)
somewhat complex spinlock variant:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
static void free_anchored_buffers(struct most_dev *mdev, unsigned int channel)
{
	struct mbo *mbo;
	struct buf_anchor *anchor, *tmp;
	unsigned long flags;

	spin_lock_irqsave(&mdev->anchor_list_lock[channel], flags);
	list_for_each_entry_safe(anchor, tmp, &mdev->anchor_list[channel],
				 list) {
		struct urb *urb = anchor->urb;

		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&mdev->anchor_list_lock[channel], flags);
		if (likely(urb)) {
			mbo = urb->context;
			if (!irqs_disabled()) {
				usb_kill_urb(urb);
			} else {
				usb_unlink_urb(urb);
				wait_for_completion(&anchor->urb_compl);
			}
			if ((mbo) && (mbo->complete)) {
				mbo->status = MBO_E_CLOSE;
				mbo->processed_length = 0;
				mbo->complete(mbo);
			}
			usb_free_urb(urb);
		}
		spin_lock_irqsave(&mdev->anchor_list_lock[channel], flags);
		list_del(&anchor->list);
		cancel_work_sync(&anchor->clear_work_obj);
		kfree(anchor);
	}
	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&mdev->anchor_list_lock[channel], flags);
}
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

To my questions:

#1: What is the intention of locking a whole function with a Mutex and then
    using spinlocks inside the function? Wouldn't it be sufficient to use
    one locking technique?
#2: Why is the spinlock not just locking the whole list_for_each_entry part or
    just the list_del(&anchor->list)?


Thank you very much in advance.

With best regards

Michael

             reply	other threads:[~2016-07-18 18:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-07-18 18:14 mhornung.linux at gmail.com [this message]
2016-07-18 20:54 ` drivers: staging: most: Locking question Greg KH

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=20160718181446.GA1650@googlemail.com \
    --to=mhornung.linux@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernelnewbies@lists.kernelnewbies.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).