Re: [PATCH 3/7] regmap: Add a mutex to guard the sync operation

[Dimitris Papastamos]

On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 04:19:37PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 03:24:06PM +0100, Dimitris Papastamos wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 01:52:50PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> 
> > > Shouldn't we either be taking the regmap lock when doing the sync or
> > > otherwise guarding against something other than a cache sync?
> 
> > Em the main issue is that the sync() implementation will use
> > regmap_write() which will grab map->lock.  To avoid this we could have
> > gone and used directly the lockless _regmap_write() but that's
> > static.  To be honest, it feels cleaner to have only 1 lock to guard
> > the map so maybe we should get rid of map->sync_lock.
> 
> Making _regmap_write() global seems fine, it's not an externally visible
> API but the cache code is part of the infrastructure.

Okay, so I'll go forth and revert the use of map->sync_lock
and just grab map->lock.

Thanks,
Dimitris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/