From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@osg.samsung.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@samsung.com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com>,
Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>
Cc: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>,
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: clk: Per controller locks (prepare & enable)
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 09:48:34 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <913d98f6-0d7c-63e3-8748-961eafd776f4@osg.samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <577B54CE.90004@samsung.com>
Hello Krzysztof,
On 07/05/2016 02:33 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/04/2016 05:15 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
[snip]
>>
>> Yes, splitting the lock per controller will fix the possible deadlock in
>> this case but I think we need an approach that is safe for all possible
>> scenarios. Otherwise it will work more by coincidence than due a design.
>
> This is not a coincidence. This design is meant to fix this deadlock.
> Not by coincidence. By design.
>
Ok, if the configurations I described doesn't exist in practice and are
just theoretical then yes, doing a per controller lock is a good design.
> You are talking about theoretical different configurations... without
> even real bug reports. I am providing an idea to fix a real deadlock and
> your argument is that it might not fix other (non-reported) deadlocks.
> These other deadlocks happen now as well probably...
>
I'm not against you re-working the locks to do it per controller, is just
that I thought it would be good to have a solution that is going to work
for all possible scenarios.
You asked for comments/opinions/ideas and I gave mine, that's all :)
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-05 13:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-29 7:23 clk: Per controller locks (prepare & enable) Krzysztof Kozlowski
2016-06-30 16:22 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2016-07-04 8:24 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2016-07-04 15:15 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2016-07-04 15:21 ` Javier Martinez Canillas
2016-07-05 6:33 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2016-07-05 13:48 ` Javier Martinez Canillas [this message]
2016-07-07 12:06 ` Charles Keepax
2016-07-07 12:42 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2016-07-07 16:00 ` Charles Keepax
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=913d98f6-0d7c-63e3-8748-961eafd776f4@osg.samsung.com \
--to=javier@osg.samsung.com \
--cc=a.hajda@samsung.com \
--cc=b.zolnierkie@samsung.com \
--cc=k.kozlowski@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
--cc=s.nawrocki@samsung.com \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=tomasz.figa@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).