[lkml]   [2017]   [Dec]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/2] of: overlay: Fix cleanup order in of_overlay_apply()
Hi Rob,

On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 8:35 PM, Rob Herring <> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 9:47 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> <> wrote:
>> The special overlay mutex is taken first, hence it should be released
>> last in the error path.
>> Move "mutex_lock(&of_mutex)" up, as suggested by Frank, as
>> free_overlay_changeset() should be called with that mutex held if any
>> non-trivial cleanup is to be done.
> Not holding the of_mutex for of_resolve_phandles is just wrong.
> Without it, a node and new phandle could be added via of_attach_node
> making the max phandle wrong.

After my patch it's held, so what's the problem?

> Now, with the 2 mutexes adjacent, what is the point of even having the
> of_overlay_mutex? Seems like we should just drop it.


> I also don't think we really need to hold the mutex during post-apply
> notifiers. It also seems like some steps could be moved outside the
> mutex(es) like init_overlay_changeset().




Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 --

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds

 \ /
  Last update: 2017-12-04 20:46    [W:0.067 / U:18.272 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site