lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Apr]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH V3 2/7] dmaengine/dw_dmac: Replace spin_lock* with irqsave variants
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 03:06:44PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> @@ -407,6 +410,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(dw_dma_get_dst_addr);
> static void dwc_handle_cyclic(struct dw_dma *dw, struct dw_dma_chan *dwc,
> u32 status_block, u32 status_err, u32 status_xfer)
> {
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> if (status_block & dwc->mask) {
> void (*callback)(void *param);
> void *callback_param;
> @@ -418,9 +423,9 @@ static void dwc_handle_cyclic(struct dw_dma *dw, struct dw_dma_chan *dwc,
> callback = dwc->cdesc->period_callback;
> callback_param = dwc->cdesc->period_callback_param;
> if (callback) {
> - spin_unlock(&dwc->lock);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dwc->lock, flags);
> callback(callback_param);
> - spin_lock(&dwc->lock);
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&dwc->lock, flags);

I'm really not convinced that this is anywhere near correct. I'm
surprised this doesn't spit out a compiler warning.

spin_unlock_irqrestore() reads the flags argument and puts it into
the PSR. spin_lock_irqsave() reads the PSR, puts it into the flags
argument, sets the interrupt mask bit and writes back to the PSR.

So, if you do:

unsigned long flags;

spin_unlock_irqrestore(&dwc->lock, flags);
...
spin_lock_irqsave(&dwc->lock, flags);

you're going to end up corrupting the PSR.

In any case, releasing a spinlock temporarily within a called function
is _really_ not a nice thing to do. It makes code review rather
difficult as called functions become non-atomic when called within
an atomic region.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-04-28 19:13    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans