Re: [RFC PATCH] regulator: Fix recursive mutex lockdep warning

[Srinivas Kandagatla]

On 06/08/15 10:43, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 05:02:08PM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> > A recursive lockdep warning occurs if you call regulator_set_voltage()
> > on a load switches that are modelled as regulators with a parent supply as
> > there is no nesting annotation for the rdev->mutex.
> > To avoid this warning, use the unlocked version of the get_voltage().
>
> No, just completely removing the locking is broken - the locking is
> there for a reason!  This needs some lockdep dance, either something

Yes, I totally agree, removing locking would have more regressions.

> like what we have for regmaps with a class per regulator or something

lock_class per regulator makes more sense, I will try to cookup an RFC 
patch.
> more fancy but whatever's going on just hacking out locking to shut up
> warnings from lockdep is clearly not a good idea.

--
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/