On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 01:57:22PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote: > Mark Brown wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:58:33PM +0100, Takashi Iwai wrote: > > > + map->lock(map->lock_arg); > > > for (i = 0; i < val_count * val_bytes; i += val_bytes) > > > map->format.parse_inplace(wval + i); > > > > > > ret = _regmap_raw_write(map, reg, wval, val_bytes * val_count); > > > + map->unlock(map->lock_arg); > > If we're reducing the locking region here then we should take the lock > > after doing the parse_inplace() to reduce the locked region. Nothing > > else can be referring to the data since we only just allocated it. I'll > > fix that by hand and apply. > I thought of that, too, but didn't take it because covering the lock > there doesn't change the fact that it's still fundamentally racy. I'm not sure what you mean here - what do you mean yb "covering the lock"? > > Please also send things to the list for the subsystem (linux-kernel if > > there's not a specific one). > OK, I just copied the previous recipient of the thread... Sure, but if there's another subsystem adding that subsystem helps things along.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
