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=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 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 E984DC76186 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:36:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF9AD229F4 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:36:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="oYm1pUYm"; dkim=fail reason="key not found in DNS" (0-bit key) header.d=codeaurora.org header.i=@codeaurora.org header.b="OmBT2s8+" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389321AbfGXTgf (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jul 2019 15:36:35 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:36736 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2389113AbfGXTgf (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jul 2019 15:36:35 -0400 Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BDEC76063F; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:36:33 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1563996993; bh=6rZFV4H+AtnrEFItZHF83yeAsV8YoILKdR1b4gFLTD0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=oYm1pUYmMQEqee4K2snbkxIwLdZKMKnU2ZPM69OR5lDW8bIH6IWxr9WdInRQP7O6C 4vLRSH0pHNFexcI4nBZzmGds23jHKFQuAmVMsYZiTihczGihsZszaEMIrbcowJqY2b wuLsVCY2Rsqf+tc+hrcB5J2vDnVK/0dsnRb9wuPo= Received: from localhost (i-global254.qualcomm.com [199.106.103.254]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ilina@smtp.codeaurora.org) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3921A605A0; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 19:36:31 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=codeaurora.org; s=default; t=1563996991; bh=6rZFV4H+AtnrEFItZHF83yeAsV8YoILKdR1b4gFLTD0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=OmBT2s8++wGXxO4N8+Dyj8Hi+INE6p4Lu/FR8W5b5iZt0AoxuGShf0IA8G6tdjdJC QRNS+TEllVKYDkuDDbyoZPZtulDxLwreq5FoKvQ7aDNKs7rQjkOrDKIoLNQAkPjbFI cyS92Zs4FeRn3XJ2Tw5Y4IotnQVbkKBpK0fDKKRI= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 smtp.codeaurora.org 3921A605A0 Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ilina@codeaurora.org Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 13:36:30 -0600 From: Lina Iyer To: Stephen Boyd Cc: agross@kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-soc@vger.kernel.org, rnayak@codeaurora.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, dianders@chromium.org, mkshah@codeaurora.org, "Raju P.L.S.S.S.N" Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/4] drivers: qcom: rpmh-rsc: simplify TCS locking Message-ID: <20190724193630.GD18620@codeaurora.org> References: <20190722215340.3071-1-ilina@codeaurora.org> <5d375054.1c69fb81.7ce3f.3591@mx.google.com> <20190723192159.GA18620@codeaurora.org> <5d376bb3.1c69fb81.2bb4e.7771@mx.google.com> <20190724145452.GC18620@codeaurora.org> <5d38a430.1c69fb81.6e696.9e6f@mx.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5d38a430.1c69fb81.6e696.9e6f@mx.google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.3 (2019-02-01) Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 24 2019 at 12:32 -0600, Stephen Boyd wrote: >Quoting Lina Iyer (2019-07-24 07:54:52) >> On Tue, Jul 23 2019 at 14:19 -0600, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> >Quoting Lina Iyer (2019-07-23 12:21:59) >> >> On Tue, Jul 23 2019 at 12:22 -0600, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> >> >Can you keep irq saving and restoring in this patch and then remove that >> >> >in the next patch with reasoning? It probably isn't safe if the lock is >> >> >taken in interrupt context anyway. >> >> > >> >> Yes, the drv->lock should have been irqsave/irqrestore, but it hasn't >> >> been changed by this patch. >> > >> >It needs to be changed to maintain the irqsaving/restoring of the code. >> > >> May be I should club this with the following patch. Instead of adding >> irqsave and restore to drv->lock and then remvoing them again in the >> following patch. >> > >I suspect that gets us back to v1 of this patch series? I'd prefer you >just keep the save/restore of irqs in this patch and then remove them >later. Or if the order can be the other way, where we remove grabbing >the lock in irq context comes first and then consolidate the locks into >one it might work. > Patches 1 and 3 need not be bundled. We can keep them separate to help understand the change better. This patch order - #2, #1, #3, #4 would work. --Lina