From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] crypto: s5p-sss - Use mutex instead of spinlock Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2017 18:28:29 +0100 Message-ID: <4289522.7Nbtc4pSSm@amdc3058> References: <20170317144922.27379-1-krzk@kernel.org> <20170317144922.27379-5-krzk@kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: Herbert Xu , "David S. Miller" , linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vladimir Zapolskiy , Nathan Royce To: Krzysztof Kozlowski Return-path: Received: from mailout4.samsung.com ([203.254.224.34]:52133 "EHLO mailout4.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751131AbdCQRai (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Mar 2017 13:30:38 -0400 In-reply-to: <20170317144922.27379-5-krzk@kernel.org> Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, On Friday, March 17, 2017 04:49:22 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Driver uses threaded interrupt handler so there is no real need for > using spinlocks for synchronization. Mutexes would do fine and are > friendlier for overall system preemptivness and real-time behavior. Are you sure that this conversion is safe? This driver also uses a tasklet and tasklets run in the interrupt context. > @@ -667,18 +666,17 @@ static void s5p_tasklet_cb(unsigned long data) > struct s5p_aes_dev *dev = (struct s5p_aes_dev *)data; > struct crypto_async_request *async_req, *backlog; > struct s5p_aes_reqctx *reqctx; > - unsigned long flags; > > - spin_lock_irqsave(&dev->lock, flags); > + mutex_lock(&dev->lock); > backlog = crypto_get_backlog(&dev->queue); > async_req = crypto_dequeue_request(&dev->queue); > > if (!async_req) { > dev->busy = false; > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->lock, flags); > + mutex_unlock(&dev->lock); > return; > } > - spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dev->lock, flags); > + mutex_unlock(&dev->lock); Best regards,