Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] ALSA: firewire-lib: restore process context workqueue to prevent deadlock

["edmund.raile" <edmund.raile@xxxxxxxxx>]

> Thank you for your sending the revised patches, it looks better than the
> previous one. However, I have an additional request.
Allright, patch v3 it is.

> [1] https://git-scm.com/docs/git-revert
Should have known git has something like that, how handy!

> $ git revert -s b5b519965c4c
Yes, 5b5 can be removed via revert, but what is the difference in
effect? Just time saving?
> $ git revert -s 7ba5ca32fe6e
This one I'd like to ask you about:
The original inline comment in amdtp-stream.c
amdtp_domain_stream_pcm_pointer()
```
// This function is called in software IRQ context of
// period_work or process context.
//
// When the software IRQ context was scheduled by software IRQ
// context of IT contexts, queued packets were already handled.
// Therefore, no need to flush the queue in buffer furthermore.
//
// When the process context reach here, some packets will be
// already queued in the buffer. These packets should be handled
// immediately to keep better granularity of PCM pointer.
//
// Later, the process context will sometimes schedules software
// IRQ context of the period_work. Then, no need to flush the
// queue by the same reason as described in the above
```
(let's call the above v1) was replaced with
```
// In software IRQ context, the call causes dead-lock to disable the tasklet
// synchronously.
```
on occasion of 7ba5ca32fe6e (let's call this v2).

I sought to replace it with
```
// use wq to prevent deadlock between process context spin_lock
// of snd_pcm_stream_lock_irq() in snd_pcm_status64() and
// softIRQ context spin_lock of snd_pcm_stream_lock_irqsave()
// in snd_pcm_period_elapsed()
```
to prevent this issue from occurring again (let's call this v3).

Should I include v1, v3 or a combination of v1 and v3 in my next patch?

> Just for safe, it is preferable to execute 'scripts/checkpatch.pl' in
> kernel tree to check the patchset generated by send-email subcommand[3].
Absolutely should have done so, sorry.

Thank you for your patience and guidance,
Edmund Raile.