From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752605AbbCIHN2 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:13:28 -0400
Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com ([209.85.212.178]:33229 "EHLO
	mail-wi0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752057AbbCIHN0 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 9 Mar 2015 03:13:26 -0400
Message-ID: <54FD480D.40604@linaro.org>
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 2015 07:13:17 +0000
From: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
CC: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
        Kumar Gala <galak@codeaurora.org>, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>, andrew@lunn.ch,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/6] eeprom: Add a simple EEPROM framework for eeprom
 providers
References: <1425548685-12887-1-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <1425548741-12930-1-git-send-email-srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> <20150307150035.GN28806@sirena.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20150307150035.GN28806@sirena.org.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org



On 07/03/15 15:00, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 05, 2015 at 09:45:41AM +0000, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>
>> +
>> +	return eeprom;
>> +}
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(eeprom_register);
>
> This framework uses regmap but regmap is EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() and this is
> using EXPORT_SYMBOL().
>
Thanks for spotting this, I will fix this in next version.

>> +int eeprom_unregister(struct eeprom_device *eeprom)
>> +{
>> +	mutex_lock(&eeprom_mutex);
>> +	if (atomic_read(&eeprom->users)) {
>> +		mutex_unlock(&eeprom_mutex);
>
> Atomic reads and a mutex - isn't the mutex enough?  Atomics are
> generally a recipie for bugs due to the complexity in using them.
Yes, you are right as long as we protect users variable with mutex, 
using atomic is really redundant, will fix it in next version.
>