From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99AC6C47082 for ; Wed, 26 May 2021 11:55:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C030611C2 for ; Wed, 26 May 2021 11:55:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234692AbhEZL5F (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 May 2021 07:57:05 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:43056 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234562AbhEZL4Y (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 May 2021 07:56:24 -0400 IronPort-SDR: BOvCTY8qFBbJbrX2+fd/iOrUl+bdusUtzdk3tdbmHGw3XSYGBxsvX0NuypMwJmgDjV1ICW5PX/ SEkGvoPrK90w== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,9995"; a="202200818" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,331,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="202200818" Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 May 2021 04:54:01 -0700 IronPort-SDR: YM/p155tk0deTvBFGMg8m8K/l55zEd5Cwudek8iMOlJ0fUePokqn2t/4e3Fg/n9UULk5g7/iZl lDyG4sG+yp2w== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.82,331,1613462400"; d="scan'208";a="547165940" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com (HELO smile) ([10.237.68.40]) by fmsmga001-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 May 2021 04:53:59 -0700 Received: from andy by smile with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lls6n-00EmzC-9r; Wed, 26 May 2021 14:53:57 +0300 Date: Wed, 26 May 2021 14:53:57 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Heikki Krogerus , Bartosz Golaszewski , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] devres: Make locking straight forward in release_nodes() Message-ID: References: <20210517122946.53161-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210517122946.53161-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, May 17, 2021 at 03:29:43PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > It seems for the sake of saving stack memory of couple of pointers, > the locking in release_nodes() callers becomes interesting. > > Replace this logic with a straight forward locking and unlocking scheme. Any comments on the series? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko