From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DAF94C8A; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 02:36:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712543762; cv=none; b=daO46pb5Bnze6GHMkkh4V7okh2yUAQOebl16U+tXGOh3/yAC7w0Niu/moMoKXsLAibJplmG5POTQuUy0+4Km2uis292X2QCpLGerLELRcycGoNUUu4ujDqvB5OKJ8JUzFl6qW2FEebIh9DnUypARq5WrSRwnvKXZ1x8ROZegUp0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1712543762; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vPKyhuBswSLMcWjuIQwilDEd+Az3YtYSaPyId04YfEE=; h=Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:References: Subject:From:Cc:To:Date; b=h5CQuuLVP+yLP99/ezNxGb2gdsuPVAKYXjwTzK45TRkwfpIbsvVD2ZFrBjobEnFWhpy88CG9XZnEt3ud2SR//LmuzWHfW6SRLpRuyi15NhR74m91mG6AYoEppGgm6yyrm0fKs4/KRklF/mZY5bkiyvGRIrQx9bQAumve/P32Uz4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=nBxkMY56; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="nBxkMY56" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EDF8AC433C7; Mon, 8 Apr 2024 02:36:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1712543762; bh=vPKyhuBswSLMcWjuIQwilDEd+Az3YtYSaPyId04YfEE=; h=In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Cc:To:Date:From; b=nBxkMY56Iy+gTlh1T98M4KTbfCUwyqamxEHqeqPu+i5O7z1V4MJ/ZPSsrXVbBxKAZ UzzKOH9lbfqom1tYIbbdtJbJuN72IqWEUaS9gs4Rn/DfFgN01hYjVpEzkw4YYeVeCT zlGgpBA9F1aKionVlbpznA5EybBSeSeDzBx4Sxg9/8gCRtmrU1GbKU9nHbvV5dy73Z 9GS1qam4q8ziPgGk7LiKkQzgqr86bS1UkS8qxOJDqpxWILrlGgPdGWjCED12nM+cbF 9U7M/4aKJPDu48FIAa+3tw4hpyRgme/PEasHGjxI8dukhXd9cq/I6YYOvZ5n1Qxtoh oBskEjL5F6wpw== Message-ID: <98005e3174d43b96e774458b37fd515f.sboyd@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <20240325184204.745706-3-sboyd@kernel.org> References: <20240325184204.745706-1-sboyd@kernel.org> <20240325184204.745706-3-sboyd@kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] clk: Don't hold prepare_lock when calling kref_put() From: Stephen Boyd Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Douglas Anderson To: Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2024 19:35:59 -0700 User-Agent: alot/0.10 Quoting Stephen Boyd (2024-03-25 11:41:56) > We don't need to hold the prepare_lock when dropping a ref on a struct > clk_core. The release function is only freeing memory and any code with > a pointer reference has already unlinked anything pointing to the > clk_core. This reduces the holding area of the prepare_lock a bit. >=20 > Note that we also don't call free_clk() with the prepare_lock held. > There isn't any reason to do that. >=20 > Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd > --- Applied to clk-fixes