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=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,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 C9029C76186 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 18:32:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1EF821926 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 18:32:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=chromium.org header.i=@chromium.org header.b="dlPXGjbx" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726911AbfGXScW (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:32:22 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f195.google.com ([209.85.210.195]:37237 "EHLO mail-pf1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727756AbfGXScS (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Jul 2019 14:32:18 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f195.google.com with SMTP id 19so21364512pfa.4 for ; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 11:32:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=chromium.org; s=google; h=message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :references:subject:to:cc:from:user-agent:date; bh=GTi6Bq8qv1MIsEGO5GGNfuTeyzBZrOU9NQN3sCHpWpU=; b=dlPXGjbxzXqoe4vdb5l7jyFruLZ+nHHe9/9E9yscqhiwlwhyBSaN4dPhkYwpa84mi7 0MpmchCjBhRFmXYVUpsYI4pzbe313pQchqM0KZxaVyFPO73RtmJq2s7g6HoZn9QWbbvl CvrnuhN6bNDpDnb0nbyMulDWbfPHmNlRrG3x4= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:references:subject:to:cc:from :user-agent:date; bh=GTi6Bq8qv1MIsEGO5GGNfuTeyzBZrOU9NQN3sCHpWpU=; b=Z7orkFtT59ElK6C7HE9K4lBAgIxo+2U1sr1eAQl764Mt6W4AhqzB0Y1PWlrpcoea0f e/M3liHqTqFwojlHvq6eTPz+sZJJBryka5m01RVl7AZ5uN1EuWWonP6R6CtVLoZ+SJiy xe1GzuRy2myGHbar3DZfqk4yOjSZNq40GBgAovF7kuQTrL/UI/TOSuDbgCodYVmXgaJd RgZ4MuPG2WqDvgt9ETKMQCI7KxGOKn0NmfWvhf1R1F0LkD3UAUVI62L5xi3ulpYEPTk5 yBZgmJViekDhQXcamTLW0ktUXOD5an4WJVguB34rFY5xb26QrOKAV6YjqcLISO2+0ZzN y1tg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUoppPkLy8bzR2RWMyARA5QzYc7joLLauWmOrxjMKMWSsS46m6z 5opCRqsrPoUBtJ2/TdcYFHNSOg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwlbxuM9oEkV60kqlua8NagirbM9q2MPlMTaGMBsIzc4Q8rsHoHFsJa6K4sRG5TpRVZbXGDRQ== X-Received: by 2002:a62:2a4d:: with SMTP id q74mr12678551pfq.86.1563993137491; Wed, 24 Jul 2019 11:32:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chromium.org ([2620:15c:202:1:fa53:7765:582b:82b9]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k8sm45880018pgm.14.2019.07.24.11.32.16 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 24 Jul 2019 11:32:16 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5d38a430.1c69fb81.6e696.9e6f@mx.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <20190724145452.GC18620@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> Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/4] drivers: qcom: rpmh-rsc: simplify TCS locking To: Lina Iyer 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" From: Stephen Boyd User-Agent: alot/0.8.1 Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 11:32:15 -0700 Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org 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 t= hat > >> >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. >=20 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.