On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 11:12 PM Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 10:52 PM Raul E Rangel <rrangel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ... > > + mutex_lock(&i8042_mutex); > > + > > spin_lock_irqsave(&i8042_lock, flags); > > retval = __i8042_command(param, command); > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&i8042_lock, flags); > > > > + mutex_unlock(&i8042_mutex); > > Question 1. Why do you need mutex at all in the above situation? Spin > lock isn't enough? > > ... > > > - i8042_lock_chip(); > > - > > if (value == LED_OFF) > > i8042_command(NULL, CLEVO_MAIL_LED_OFF); > > else if (value <= LED_HALF) > > i8042_command(NULL, CLEVO_MAIL_LED_BLINK_0_5HZ); > > else > > i8042_command(NULL, CLEVO_MAIL_LED_BLINK_1HZ); > > - > > - i8042_unlock_chip(); > > - > > Now, these three commands are not considered as a transaction (no > atomicity). That's why your patch is wrong. Ah, I didn't pay attention that this is one command call. But still Q1 is valid. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
