On Wed, 2015-04-29 at 13:25 +0100, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/scpi_protocol.c
> b/drivers/mailbox/scpi_protocol.c
> index c74575b..5818d9b 100644
> --- a/drivers/mailbox/scpi_protocol.c
> +++ b/drivers/mailbox/scpi_protocol.c
> @@ -286,14 +286,23 @@ static void scpi_tx_prepare(struct mbox_client
> *c, void *msg)
> struct scpi_chan *ch = container_of(c, struct scpi_chan, cl);
> struct scpi_shared_mem *mem = (struct scpi_shared_mem
> *)ch->tx_payload;
>
> - mem->command = cpu_to_le32(t->cmd);
> if (t->tx_buf)
> memcpy_toio(mem->payload, t->tx_buf, t->tx_len);
> if (t->rx_buf) {
> + int token;
> spin_lock_irqsave(&ch->rx_lock, flags);
> + /*
> + * Presumably we can do this token setting outside
> + * spinlock and still be safe from concurrency?
> + */
To answer my own question, yes, the four lines below can be moved up
above the spin_lock_irqsave. Because we had better be safe from
concurrency here as we are also writing to the channel's shared memory
area.
> + do
> + token = (++ch->token) & CMD_TOKEN_ID_MASK;
> + while(!token);
> + t->cmd |= token << CMD_TOKEN_ID_SHIFT;
> list_add_tail(&t->node, &ch->rx_pending);
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&ch->rx_lock, flags);
> }
> + mem->command = cpu_to_le32(t->cmd);
> }
>
> static struct scpi_xfer *get_scpi_xfer(struct scpi_chan *ch)
--
Tixy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
