On Mon, 11 Apr 2011, Roedel, Joerg wrote:
> > > > > + ret = amd_chipset.probe_result;
> > > > > +
> > > > > + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&amd_lock, flags);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + if (info.nb_dev)
> > > > > + pci_dev_put(info.nb_dev);
> > > > > + if (info.smbus_dev)
> > > > > + pci_dev_put(info.smbus_dev);
> > > > > +
> > > > > + } else {
> > > > > + /* no race - commit the result */
> > > > > + info.probe_count++;
> > > >
> > > > This isn't right, because info.probe_count was initialized to 0. Maybe
> > > > amd_chipset.probe_count should be made into a separate variable, not a
> > > > part of the structure, like amd_lock.
> > >
> > > The purpose of the struct is structuring of data. In theory all of its
> > > members could be turned into global variables. The amd_lock is different
> > > because it does not only protect the struct but also access to the
> > > hardware while the quirk is applied/unapplied.
> >
> > Do it however you prefer. But as it stands now, the patch is wrong.
>
> Hmm, I see how it can be done differently, but no real bug.
Never mind, you're right. In the no-race case, the initial count is
always going to be 0, and so incrementing info.probe_count is the right
thing to do.
Alan Stern
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
