Messages in this thread | | | From | Doug Anderson <> | Date | Wed, 30 Aug 2023 13:54:21 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] regulator/core: regulator_lock_nested: simplify nested locking |
| |
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 10:35 AM Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl> wrote: > > Simplify regulator locking by removing locking around locking. > rdev->ref check when unlocking is moved inside the critical section. > > This patch depends on commit 12235da8c80a ("kernel/locking: Add context > to ww_mutex_trylock()"). > > Note: return -EALREADY is removed as no caller depends on it and in that > case the lock count is incremented anyway. > > Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> > Signed-off-by: Michał Mirosław <mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl> > --- > drivers/regulator/core.c | 23 ++++++----------------- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
Note that I didn't actually provide a Reviewed-by on this patch in v1. I was hoping for something in the commit message that explained why commit 12235da8c80a ("kernel/locking: Add context to ww_mutex_trylock()") meant that we didn't need the extra lock. You responded to the v1, but didn't add anything to the commit message about it.
Looking at your response to v1, I'm not sure it helps enlighten me on why adding the context removed the need for the extra lock. Can you add more words? Pretend I don't know anything about ww_mutex, which is not far from the truth since every time I look at ww_mutex I have to re-learn how it works. :-P Specifically, what would actually have been broken without the extra lock but before the context was added?
-Doug
| |