lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/3] gpio: mockup: add locking
pt., 16 lis 2018 o 22:43 Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> napisał(a):
>
> On Thu, Nov 8, 2018 at 5:53 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote:
>
> > While no user reported any race condition problems with gpio-mockup,
> > let's be on the safe side and use a mutex when performing any changes
> > on the dummy chip structures.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
> > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
>
> I tried to apply this but it failed, does it require patch 1?
>

Yes, because of the change in get_direction().

> I can pull in the next -rc after I merged the fix in that case
> and we can apply on top.
>

This is fine, it's aimed for 4.21 anyway.

> __gpio_*
> I tend to dislike __underscore_notation because I feel it
> is semantically ambguous. I prefer a proper name, even
> to the point that I prefer inner_function_foo over __foo,
> but it's your driver and I might be a bit grumpy. :)
>

I think this is a common and intuitive pattern in the kernel codebase.
Many subsystems and drivers use '__' to mark functions that execute
internal logic and expect certain locks to be held etc.

If you don't mind, I'd like to leave it like this.

Bart

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-19 10:09    [W:0.085 / U:8.888 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site