From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@gmail.com>
To: jonghwa3.lee@samsung.com
Cc: sameo@linux.intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
cw00.choi@samsung.com, Chiwoong byun <woong.byun@samsung.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>,
MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MFD : add MAX77686 mfd driver
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 11:28:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120502092838.GA16327@andi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FA0BFFF.8090306@samsung.com>
Hi,
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 02:02:55PM +0900, jonghwa3.lee@samsung.com wrote:
> On 2012-04-30 18:17, Andi Shyti wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >> + mutex_lock(&max77686->iolock);
> >> + ret = i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data(i2c, reg, count, buf);
> >> + mutex_unlock(&max77686->iolock);
> >
> > Is it relly necessay to lock whenever you read/write from/to the
> > i2c bus? Considering also that these are exported function,
> > someone else may lock here before, so we can have a double
> > locking on the same mutex.
>
> These exported functions will be used in 77686 area only, so there is no
> overlap locking.
OK... I think this could be a reason more to not over-use mutexes :)
When you call i2c_smbus_* functions you are not accessing to any
private data, all the new data is allocated in a new area. The
smbus_xfer function should take care by himself that the global
data are locked correctly. If not, is not up to your driver to do
it.
If, instead, you are taking care about the concurrency in the
bus, this should be somehow managed by the chip itself.
In my opinion you are abusing a bit of mutex_lock/unlock.
Andi
P.S. copied and paste your reply at the bottom of my previous
comment.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-02 9:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-30 8:53 [PATCH] MFD : add MAX77686 mfd driver Jonghwa Lee
2012-04-30 9:17 ` Andi Shyti
2012-05-02 5:02 ` jonghwa3.lee
2012-05-02 9:28 ` Andi Shyti [this message]
2012-05-01 16:58 ` Mark Brown
2012-05-02 5:01 ` jonghwa3.lee
2012-05-02 8:52 ` Mark Brown
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-04-30 8:57 함명주
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=20120502092838.GA16327@andi \
--to=andi.shyti@gmail.com \
--cc=cw00.choi@samsung.com \
--cc=jonghwa3.lee@samsung.com \
--cc=kyungmin.park@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=myungjoo.ham@samsung.com \
--cc=sameo@linux.intel.com \
--cc=woong.byun@samsung.com \
/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