From: "Michał Mirosław" <mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl>
To: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] regulator/core: regulator_lock_nested: simplify nested locking
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2023 00:43:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZPEXlf26YBQB4WMt@qmqm.qmqm.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAE-0n53a75cgRNJOdn1=19OG_yJt9DDXHZ4quhZwCtZiQ1RUxQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 01:36:38PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Michał Mirosław (2023-08-30 10:35:31)
> > Simplify regulator locking by removing locking around locking.
>
> Maybe this should say "Simplify regulator_lock_nested() by removing the
> `regulator_nesting_mutex` now that rdev is locked whenever rdev->ref_cnt or
> rdev->owner are modified"?
I'll rework the message. Thanks for the hints!
[...]
> > Note: return -EALREADY is removed as no caller depends on it and in that
> > case the lock count is incremented anyway.
>
> Where is -EALREADY removed in this patch? Perhaps "removed" should be
> "ignored"?
>
> Note: A return value of -EALREADY from ww_mutex_lock() in
> regulator_lock_nested() is ignored as no caller depends on it.
I can actually remove this altogether: ww_mutex_lock() won't ever
return -EALREADY as it's called only if (rdev->mutex_owner != current).
Best Regards.
Michał Mirosław
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-31 22:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-30 17:35 [PATCH v2 0/7] regulator: core: locking cleanups, part 1/inf Michał Mirosław
2023-08-30 17:35 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] regulator/core: regulator_lock_nested: remove `lock` Michał Mirosław
2023-08-30 17:35 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] regulator/core: regulator_lock_nested: skip extra lock for -EDEADLK Michał Mirosław
2023-08-30 17:35 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] regulator/core: regulator_lock_nested: simplify nested locking Michał Mirosław
2023-08-30 20:36 ` Stephen Boyd
2023-08-31 22:43 ` Michał Mirosław [this message]
2023-08-30 20:54 ` Doug Anderson
2023-08-31 22:41 ` Michał Mirosław
2023-08-30 17:35 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] regulator/core: regulator_lock_contended: wrap ww_mutex lock sequence restart Michał Mirosław
2023-08-30 20:21 ` Doug Anderson
2023-08-30 17:35 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] regulator/core: regulator_resolve_supply: remove gotos Michał Mirosław
2023-08-30 17:35 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] regulator/core: regulator_lock_two: remove duplicate locking code Michał Mirosław
2023-08-30 20:33 ` Doug Anderson
2023-08-30 17:35 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] regulator/core: regulator_lock_two: propagate error up Michał Mirosław
2023-08-30 20:32 ` Doug Anderson
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=ZPEXlf26YBQB4WMt@qmqm.qmqm.pl \
--to=mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=dianders@chromium.org \
--cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=swboyd@chromium.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®