Re: [PATCH 1/3] pinctrl: core: create unlocked version of pinctrl_find_gpio_range_from_pin

[Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 4:15 PM, Joachim  Eastwood <manabian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 25 February 2016 at 15:55, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Joachim  Eastwood <manabian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>> Or rather, pinctrl_fund_gpio_range_from_pin_locked(),
>>>> indicating that you're already holding the necessary lock
>>>> when calling the function. Now I'm even confusing myself,
>>>> sorry :(
>>>
>>> Shouldn't the function name indicate what the function does with the lock?
>>>
>>> pinctrl_fund_gpio_range_from_pin_unlocked() would indicate to me that
>>> it does not acquire a lock and it is your responsibility as a caller
>>> to ensure that the correct lock is held before calling.
>>
>> OK hm maybe you're right, grep the kernel for precedents.
>
> hmm, I not sure anymore.
>
> What do you think about pinctrl_find_gpio_range_from_pin_nolock()?
>
> The _nolock() prefix is also used in the kernel and might convey what
> we want better. Thoughts?

Go for it.

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html