On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 01:16:30PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> On 7/10/18 12:02 PM, Sanyog Kale wrote:
> >On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 06:42:34PM -0500, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> >>Sorry, another issue that I found while reviewing the entire section.
> >>> }
> >>>@@ -888,6 +918,7 @@ static void sdw_release_slave_stream(struct sdw_slave *slave,
> >>> /**
> >>> * sdw_release_master_stream() - Free Master runtime handle
> >>> *
> >>>+ * @m_rt: Master runtime node
> >>> * @stream: Stream runtime handle.
> >>> *
> >>> * This function is to be called with bus_lock held
> >>>@@ -895,16 +926,18 @@ static void sdw_release_slave_stream(struct sdw_slave *slave,
> >>> * handle. If this is called first then sdw_release_slave_stream() will have
> >>> * no effect as Slave(s) runtime handle would already be freed up.
> >>> */
> >>>-static void sdw_release_master_stream(struct sdw_stream_runtime *stream)
> >>>+static void sdw_release_master_stream(struct sdw_master_runtime *m_rt,
> >>>+ struct sdw_stream_runtime *stream)
> >>> {
> >>>- struct sdw_master_runtime *m_rt = stream->m_rt;
> >>> struct sdw_slave_runtime *s_rt, *_s_rt;
> >>> list_for_each_entry_safe(s_rt, _s_rt,
> >>> &m_rt->slave_rt_list, m_rt_node)
> >>> sdw_stream_remove_slave(s_rt->slave, stream);
> >>>+ list_del(&m_rt->stream_node);
> >>> list_del(&m_rt->bus_node);
> >>>+ kfree(m_rt);
> >>> }
> >>> /**
> >>>@@ -918,13 +951,22 @@ static void sdw_release_master_stream(struct sdw_stream_runtime *stream)
> >>> int sdw_stream_remove_master(struct sdw_bus *bus,
> >>> struct sdw_stream_runtime *stream)
> >>> {
> >>>+ struct sdw_master_runtime *m_rt, *_m_rt;
> >>>+
> >>> mutex_lock(&bus->bus_lock);
> >>>- sdw_release_master_stream(stream);
> >>>- sdw_master_port_release(bus, stream->m_rt);
> >>>- stream->state = SDW_STREAM_RELEASED;
> >>>- kfree(stream->m_rt);
> >>>- stream->m_rt = NULL;
> >>>+ list_for_each_entry_safe(m_rt, _m_rt,
> >>>+ &stream->master_list, stream_node) {
> >>>+
> >>>+ if (m_rt->bus != bus)
> >>>+ continue;
> >>>+
> >>>+ sdw_master_port_release(bus, m_rt);
> >>>+ sdw_release_master_stream(m_rt, stream);
> >>>+ }
> >>>+
> >>>+ if (list_empty(&stream->master_list))
> >>>+ stream->state = SDW_STREAM_RELEASED;
> >>> mutex_unlock(&bus->bus_lock);
> >>>
> >>So the sequence is
> >>
> >>mutex_lock
> >>sdw_master_port_release()
> >>sdw_release_master_stream()
> >>?????? sdw_stream_remove_slave()
> >>?????? ?????? mutex_lock
> >>
> >>Is this intentional to take the same mutex twice (not sure if it even
> >>works).
> >
> >sdw_stream_remove_slave is called from sdw_release_master_stream to make
> >sure all Slave(s) resources are freed up before freeing Master.
> >sdw_stream_remove_slave is also called by Slave driver to free up Slave
> >resources. In either case, we wanted to make sure the bus_lock is held
> >hence the bus lock is held in sdw_stream_remove_slave API as well.
>
> Yes, it's fine to take the lock from sdw_stream_remove_slave(), the point
> was to avoid taking the lock twice when the master is removed first.
>
> >
> >It doesnt look correct to take same mutex twice. Will check on this.
> >
> >>what you probably wanted is to replace sdw_stream_remove_slave() by the
> >>equivalent sequence
> >>
> >>sdw_slave_port_release()
> >>sdw_release_slave_stream()
> >>
> >>which are both supposed to be called with a bus_lock held.
> >
> >you mean to say perform sdw_slave_port_release and
> >sdw_release_slave_stream in sdw_release_master_stream instead of calling
> >sdw_stream_remove_slave??
>
> Yes, something like the change below:
>
> static void sdw_release_master_stream(struct sdw_master_runtime *m_rt,
> struct sdw_stream_runtime *stream)
> {
> struct sdw_master_runtime *m_rt = stream->m_rt;
> struct sdw_slave_runtime *s_rt, *_s_rt;
> list_for_each_entry_safe(s_rt, _s_rt,
> &m_rt->slave_rt_list, m_rt_node)
> - sdw_stream_remove_slave(s_rt->slave, stream);
> + sdw_slave_port_release()
> + sdw_release_slave_stream()
> list_del(&m_rt->stream_node);
> list_del(&m_rt->bus_node);
> kfree(m_rt);
> }
Ok. Will update in next version.
Thanks
>
--
_______________________________________________
Alsa-devel mailing list
Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
