From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
To: "Adamski, Krzysztof (Nokia - PL/Wroclaw)" <krzysztof.adamski@nokia.com>
Cc: "Wolfram Sang" <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>,
"linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
"Niklas Söderlund" <niklas.soderlund@ragnatech.se>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT] i2c: emev2: avoid race when unregistering slave client
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 13:11:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190809111123.GB1143@ninjato> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190809104016.GC25406@localhost.localdomain>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 776 bytes --]
> I don't see how this could influence the standard I2C communication at
> all. If change in em_i2c_unreg_slave() is excluded, all that was changed
> is moving irq number from local variable to the em_i2c_device struct
> which is also not used outside of the em_i2c_unreg_slave() appart from
> logging :)
I agree. Still, I do have brown-paper-bag experiences caused by wrong
assumptions like "this cannot fail". And we are changing the way
interrupts are acquired. So, if it is not too hard, I'd prefer to have
patches tested, too. I'd still apply the patch if it turns out to be too
complicated to test (given the reviews raise the trust). Yet, also on
the pro-side, it doesn't hurt to test a newer kernel on a packed-away
system once in a while.
Thanks for the reviews!
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-09 11:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-08 19:54 [PATCH RFT] i2c: emev2: avoid race when unregistering slave client Wolfram Sang
2019-08-08 21:51 ` Niklas Söderlund
2019-08-09 10:40 ` Adamski, Krzysztof (Nokia - PL/Wroclaw)
2019-08-09 11:11 ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2019-08-14 12:48 ` Wolfram Sang
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=20190809111123.GB1143@ninjato \
--to=wsa@the-dreams.de \
--cc=krzysztof.adamski@nokia.com \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=niklas.soderlund@ragnatech.se \
--cc=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.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).