lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Nov]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] usb/mos7720: process deferred urbs in a workqueue
On Wed, 04 Nov 2020, Johan Hovold wrote:

>Hmm. I took at closer look at the parport code and it seems the current
>implementation is already racy but that removing the tasklet is going to
>widen that that window.
>
>Those register writes in restore() should be submitted before any
>later requests. Perhaps setting a flag and flushing the work in
>parport_prologue() could work?

Ah, I see and agree. Considering work is only deferred from restore_state()
I don't even think we need a flag, no? We can let parport_prologue()
just flush_work() unconditionally (right before taking the disc_mutex)
which for the most part will be idle anyway. The flush_work() also becomes
saner now that we'll stop rescheduling work in send_deferred_urbs().

Also, but not strictly related to this. What do you think of deferring all
work in write_parport_reg_nonblock() unconditionally? I'd like to avoid
that mutex_trylock() because eventually I'll be re-adding a warn in the
locking code, but that would also simplify the code done here in the
nonblocking irq write. I'm not at all familiar with parport, but I would
think that restore_state context would not care.

>On the other hand, the restore() implementation looks broken in that it
>doesn't actually restore the provided state. I'll go fix that up.

How did this thing ever work?

Thanks,
Davidlohr

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-11-05 01:35    [W:0.061 / U:0.400 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site