From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753557AbbGRLbq (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Jul 2015 07:31:46 -0400 Received: from mail-ig0-f175.google.com ([209.85.213.175]:34102 "EHLO mail-ig0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753007AbbGRLbo (ORCPT ); Sat, 18 Jul 2015 07:31:44 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [62.219.232.49] In-Reply-To: <20150702203028.GA4711@linaro.org> References: <1433867020-7746-1-git-send-email-lina.iyer@linaro.org> <20150627030514.GA893@linaro.org> <20150702203028.GA4711@linaro.org> From: Ohad Ben-Cohen Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2015 14:31:24 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] hwspinlock: Introduce raw capability for hwspinlock_device To: Lina Iyer Cc: Bjorn Andersson , Jeffrey Hugo , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Lina, On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 11:30 PM, Lina Iyer wrote: > You are right, RAW capability is not lock specific. But we dont want to > impose this on every lock in the bank either. I'm not sure I'm following your concern here: drivers still need to explicitly indicate RAW in order for this to kick in, so this lenient approach is not being imposed on them. Your original patch allowed every driver on all platforms to disable the sw spinlock mechanism. What I'm merely suggesting is that the underlying platform-specific driver should first allow this before it is being used, as some vendors prohibit this completely. Let's not make this more complicated than needed, so please add the hwcaps member to hwspinlock_device instead of to hwspinlock struct. We could always change this later if it proves to be insufficient. Thanks, Ohad.