Re: [PATCH] Lock 7 is cpuidle specific, use non-generic value for locking

[Lina Iyer]

On Thu, Mar 12 2015 at 14:49 -0600, Andy Gross wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 01:38:28PM -0600, Lina Iyer wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >  static int qcom_hwspinlock_trylock(struct hwspinlock *lock)
> >  {
> >  	struct regmap_field *field = lock->priv;
> >  	u32 lock_owner;
> >  	int ret;
> > +	u32 proc_id;
> >
> > -	ret = regmap_field_write(field, QCOM_MUTEX_APPS_PROC_ID);
> > +	proc_id = hwspin_lock_get_id(lock) == QCOM_CPUIDLE_LOCK ?
> > +			QCOM_MUTEX_CPUIDLE_OFFSET + smp_processor_id():
> > +			QCOM_MUTEX_APPS_PROC_ID;
> > +
> > +	ret = regmap_field_write(field, proc_id);
>
> I think I'd rather have a qcom specific function and EXPORT_SYMBOL that to deal
> with this special case.
I was going back and forth between a function and inlining this here.
But Stephen just made a good point that this is needed for unlock as
well. A function would be good.


> >  	if (ret)
> >  		return ret;
> >
> > @@ -42,7 +49,7 @@ static int qcom_hwspinlock_trylock(struct hwspinlock *lock)
> >  	if (ret)
> >  		return ret;
> >
> > -	return lock_owner == QCOM_MUTEX_APPS_PROC_ID;
> > +	return lock_owner == proc_id;
> >  }
> >
> >  static void qcom_hwspinlock_unlock(struct hwspinlock *lock)
> > --
> > 2.1.0
>
> --
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
> a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/