Re: [PATCH] ACPICA: Export mutex functions

Guenter Roeck
2017-04-17T19:45:35Z

On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 07:27:37PM +0000, Moore, Robert wrote:
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Moore, Robert
> > Sent: Monday, April 17, 2017 10:13 AM
> > To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>; Zheng, Lv <lv.zheng@intel.com>
> > Cc: Wysocki, Rafael J <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>; Len Brown
> > <lenb@kernel.org>; linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org; devel@acpica.org; linux-
> > kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH] ACPICA: Export mutex functions
> >
> > There is a model for the drivers to directly acquire an AML mutex
> > object. That is why the acquire/release public interfaces were added to
> > ACPICA.
> >
> > I forget all of the details, but the model was developed with MS and
> > others during the ACPI 6.0 timeframe.
> >
> >
> [Moore, Robert]
>
>
> Here is the case where the OS may need to directly acquire an AML mutex:
>
> From the ACPI spec:
>
> 19.6.2 Acquire (Acquire a Mutex)
>
> Note: For Mutex objects referenced by a _DLM object, the host OS may also contend for ownership.
>
>From the context in the dsdt, and from description of expected use cases for
_DLM objects I can find, this is what the mutex is used for (to serialize
access to a resource on a low pin count serial interconnect, aka LPC).

What does that mean in practice ? That I am not supposed to use it because
it doesn't follow standard ACPI mutex declaration rules ?

Thanks,
Guenter

>
>
>
> Other than this case, the OS/drivers should never need to directly acquire an AML mutex.
> Bob
>