Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] hwspinlock: Introduce raw capability for hwspinlock_device

[Lina Iyer]

Hi Ohad,

Any comments?

Thanks,
Lina

On Tue, Jun 09 2015 at 10:23 -0600, Lina Iyer wrote:
> This patch follows the discussion based on the first RFC series posted on the
> mailing list [1]. The discussion resulted in a couple of directives for
> hwspinlocks that do not want the framework imposing a s/w spinlock around the
> hwspinlock.
>
> i. The default should only be a s/w spinlock around the hwspinlock to ensure
> correctness of locking.
>
> ii. Existing users may not use raw capability, unless the platform registers
> support for it.
>
> iii. Platform driver for hwspinlock should dictate which locks can be operated
> in raw mode.
>
> iv. Platform driver and the hw holds the responsibility to ensure the
> correctness of acquiring the hwspinlock.
>
> This patchset implements these directives.
>
> Changes since RFC v1:
> - Introduce 'raw' capability for hwspinlocks.
> - Platform code now has to explicitly specify the raw capability of a lock.
> - Check to ensure that only those locks explicitly marked as raw capable can be
>  locked/unlocked through the _raw api
> - QCOM patch for making lock #7 raw capable added.
> - Add documentation
>
> Thanks,
> Lina
>
> [1]. https://patches.linaro.org/47895/
>
> Lina Iyer (2):
>  hwspinlock: Introduce raw capability for hwspinlocks
>  hwspinlock: qcom: Lock #7 is special lock, uses dynamic proc_id
>
> Documentation/hwspinlock.txt             | 16 +++++++
> drivers/hwspinlock/hwspinlock_core.c     | 75 +++++++++++++++++++-------------
> drivers/hwspinlock/hwspinlock_internal.h |  6 +++
> drivers/hwspinlock/qcom_hwspinlock.c     | 22 +++++++---
> include/linux/hwspinlock.h               | 41 +++++++++++++++++
> 5 files changed, 125 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.1.4
--
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/