On Mon, 27 Oct 2014, Jiang Liu wrote: > We are going to support ACPI based IOAPIC hotplug, so introduce a rwsem > to protect IOAPIC data structures from IOAPIC hotplug. We choose to > serialize in ACPI instead of in the IOAPIC core because: > 1) currently we are only plan to support ACPI based IOAPIC hotplug > 2) it's much more cleaner and easier > 3) It does't affect IOAPIC discovered by devicetree, SFI and mpparse. I had a last intensive look at this series as I was about to merge it. So I looked at the locking rules here again > +/* > + * Locks related to IOAPIC hotplug > + * Hotplug side: > + * ->lock_device_hotplug() //device_hotplug_lock > + * ->acpi_ioapic_rwsem > + * ->ioapic_lock > + * Interrupt mapping side: > + * ->acpi_ioapic_rwsem > + * ->ioapic_mutex > + * ->ioapic_lock > + */ This looks sane, but I cannot figure out at all why this needs to be a rwsem. > +static DECLARE_RWSEM(acpi_ioapic_rwsem); I think it should be a simple mutex because the rwsem does not protect against concurrent execution what taken for read. And the site which takes it for write is in the early boot process where nothing runs in parallel AFAICT. Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
