Re: [PATCH 09/14] media: rzg2l-cru: Split hw locking from buffers
From: Tommaso Merciai
Date: Mon Mar 30 2026 - 12:25:23 EST
On Mon, Mar 30, 2026 at 12:19:00PM +0100, Dan Scally wrote:
> Hi Jacopo
>
> On 27/03/2026 17:10, Jacopo Mondi wrote:
> > From: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo.mondi+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Split the locking between a spinlock dedicated to protect the hardware
> > slots programming (hw_lock) and one lock (qlock) to protect the queue of
> > buffers submitted by userspace.
> >
> > Do not rework the locking strategy yet but start simply by splitting the
> > locking in two.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo.mondi+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > .../media/platform/renesas/rzg2l-cru/rzg2l-video.c | 32 +++++++++++++---------
> > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/renesas/rzg2l-cru/rzg2l-video.c b/drivers/media/platform/renesas/rzg2l-cru/rzg2l-video.c
> > index a79b17e146bf..9406a089ec9f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/platform/renesas/rzg2l-cru/rzg2l-video.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/platform/renesas/rzg2l-cru/rzg2l-video.c
> > @@ -112,19 +112,21 @@ static void return_unused_buffers(struct rzg2l_cru_dev *cru,
> > struct rzg2l_cru_buffer *buf, *node;
> > unsigned int i;
> > - guard(spinlock_irq)(&cru->qlock);
> > -
> > - for (i = 0; i < cru->num_buf; i++) {
> > - if (cru->queue_buf[i]) {
> > - vb2_buffer_done(&cru->queue_buf[i]->vb2_buf,
> > - state);
> > - cru->queue_buf[i] = NULL;
> > + scoped_guard(spinlock_irq, &cru->hw_lock) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < cru->num_buf; i++) {
> > + if (cru->queue_buf[i]) {
> > + vb2_buffer_done(&cru->queue_buf[i]->vb2_buf,
> > + state);
> > + cru->queue_buf[i] = NULL;
> > + }
> > }
> > }
> > - list_for_each_entry_safe(buf, node, &cru->buf_list, list) {
> > - vb2_buffer_done(&buf->vb.vb2_buf, state);
> > - list_del(&buf->list);
> > + scoped_guard(spinlock_irq, &cru->qlock) {
> > + list_for_each_entry_safe(buf, node, &cru->buf_list, list) {
> > + vb2_buffer_done(&buf->vb.vb2_buf, state);
> > + list_del(&buf->list);
> > + }
> > }
> > }
> > @@ -198,12 +200,16 @@ static void rzg2l_cru_fill_hw_slot(struct rzg2l_cru_dev *cru, int slot)
> > struct rzg2l_cru_buffer *buf;
> > dma_addr_t phys_addr;
> > + lockdep_assert_held(&cru->hw_lock);
>
> I think this condition mightn't be true at the point of this commit; as far
> as I can see this function is called without hw_lock being held in
> rzg2l_cru_initialize_axi() until patch 12.
Agree.
Kind Regards,
Tommaso
>
> > +
> > /* A already populated slot shall never be overwritten. */
> > if (WARN_ON(cru->queue_buf[slot]))
> > return;
> > dev_dbg(cru->dev, "Filling HW slot: %d\n", slot);
> > + guard(spinlock)(&cru->qlock);
> > +
> > if (list_empty(&cru->buf_list)) {
> > cru->queue_buf[slot] = NULL;
> > phys_addr = cru->scratch_phys;
> > @@ -342,7 +348,7 @@ void rzg2l_cru_stop_image_processing(struct rzg2l_cru_dev *cru)
> > unsigned int retries = 0;
> > u32 icnms;
> > - scoped_guard(spinlock_irq, &cru->qlock) {
> > + scoped_guard(spinlock_irq, &cru->hw_lock) {
> > /* Disable and clear the interrupt */
> > cru->info->disable_interrupts(cru);
> > }
> > @@ -560,7 +566,7 @@ irqreturn_t rzg2l_cru_irq(int irq, void *data)
> > u32 amnmbs;
> > int slot;
> > - guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&cru->qlock);
> > + guard(spinlock_irqsave)(&cru->hw_lock);
> > irq_status = rzg2l_cru_read(cru, CRUnINTS);
> > if (!irq_status)
> > @@ -662,7 +668,7 @@ irqreturn_t rzg3e_cru_irq(int irq, void *data)
> > u32 irq_status;
> > int slot;
> > - guard(spinlock)(&cru->qlock);
> > + guard(spinlock)(&cru->hw_lock);
> > irq_status = rzg2l_cru_read(cru, CRUnINTS2);
> > if (!irq_status)
> >
>