linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@ru.mvista.com>
To: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
Cc: Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>,
	David Brownell <dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net>,
	devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org,
	microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] of/gpio: Introduce of_put_gpio(), add ref counting for OF GPIO chips
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 22:14:27 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100209191427.GA18263@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <fa686aa41002090928o6911d095ydca1e1e670a0fc22@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Feb 09, 2010 at 10:28:15AM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
[...]
> Rather than having a lock at the device tree data pointer level which
> mixes usage with potentially many other drivers; wouldn't it make more
> sense to use a mutex at the of_gc subsystem context?

I don't think so.

of_gc = np->data;
lock(of_gc); (or lock(devtree))
<do something with of_gc>

doesn't provide us what we need, i.e. it doesn't guarantee that
np->data (of_gc) is still alive.

And here:

lock(np->data); (or lock(devtree))
of_gc = np->data;
lock(of_gc);
<do something with of_gc>

The second lock becomes useless (unless you also refcount np->data
usage and can drop the devtree/np->data lock, and grab some other
kind of lock, e.g. mutex, but this is silly).

Thanks,

-- 
Anton Vorontsov
email: cbouatmailru@gmail.com
irc://irc.freenode.net/bd2

  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-09 19:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-05 20:49 [PATCH RFC 0/3] Implement refcounting for OF GPIO chips Anton Vorontsov
2010-02-05 20:50 ` [PATCH 1/3] of platforms: Move common static initialization to of_node_init() Anton Vorontsov
2010-02-09 17:22   ` Grant Likely
2010-02-05 20:50 ` [PATCH 2/3] of: Introduce safe accessors for node->data Anton Vorontsov
2010-02-09 17:25   ` Grant Likely
2010-02-09 19:10     ` Anton Vorontsov
2010-02-05 20:50 ` [PATCH 3/3] of/gpio: Introduce of_put_gpio(), add ref counting for OF GPIO chips Anton Vorontsov
2010-02-09  9:15   ` Michal Simek
2010-02-09  9:20     ` Michal Simek
2010-02-09 17:28   ` Grant Likely
2010-02-09 19:14     ` Anton Vorontsov [this message]
2010-02-15 19:49       ` Grant Likely
2010-02-15 20:59         ` Anton Vorontsov
2010-02-09  9:40 ` [PATCH RFC 0/3] Implement refcounting " Michal Simek
2010-02-09 17:29   ` Grant Likely
2010-02-09 19:06   ` Anton Vorontsov

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=20100209191427.GA18263@oksana.dev.rtsoft.ru \
    --to=avorontsov@ru.mvista.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dbrownell@users.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
    --cc=microblaze-uclinux@itee.uq.edu.au \
    --cc=monstr@monstr.eu \
    /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).