Hi Breno,
Thanks for the review!
On Wed, Nov 22, 2023, at 2:44 PM, Breno Leitao wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 13, 2023 at 11:54:33AM -0500, Mark Pearson wrote:
>> @@ -10355,6 +10361,17 @@ static int dytc_profile_set(struct platform_profile_handler *pprof,
>> if (err)
>> goto unlock;
>>
>> + /* Set TMS mode appropriately (enable for performance), if available */
>> + if (dytc_ultraperf_cap) {
>> + int cmd;
>> +
>> + cmd = DYTC_SET_COMMAND(DYTC_FUNCTION_TMS, DYTC_NOMODE,
>> + profile == PLATFORM_PROFILE_PERFORMANCE);
>> + err = dytc_command(cmd, &output);
>> + if (err)
>> + return err;
>
> Aren't you returning holding the 'dytc_mutex' mutex?
>
> From what I understand, in the first line of this function you get the lock,
> and release later, at the exit, so, returning without releasing the lock might
> be dangerous. Here is a summary of how I read this function with your change:
>
>
> mutex_lock_interruptible(&dytc_mutex);
> ...
> err = dytc_command(cmd, &output);
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> unlock:
> mutex_unlock(&dytc_mutex);
> return err;
>
>
> I think "goto unlock" might solve it.
Yep - you're right. Good catch.
Will fix in the next revision.
Thank you
Mark
_______________________________________________
ibm-acpi-devel mailing list
ibm-acpi-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ibm-acpi-devel
