Hi, On 08-01-17 16:27, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Sun, 2017-01-08 at 14:44 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Take the punit lock to stop others from accessing the punit while the >> pmic i2c bus is in use. This is necessary because accessing the punit >> from the kernel may result in the punit trying to access the pmic i2c >> bus, which results in a hang when it happens while we own the pmic i2c >> bus semaphore. >> >> BugLink: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=155241 >> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com> >> Tested-by: tagorereddy <tagore.chandan at gmail.com> >> --- >> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-baytrail.c | 4 ++++ >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-baytrail.c >> b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-baytrail.c >> index 3effc9a..cf7a2a0 100644 >> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-baytrail.c >> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-baytrail.c >> > >> @@ -62,6 +62,8 @@ static void reset_semaphore(struct dw_i2c_dev *dev) > >> + iosf_mbi_punit_unlock(); > >> @@ -79,6 +81,8 @@ static int baytrail_i2c_acquire(struct dw_i2c_dev >> + iosf_mbi_punit_lock(); > > For me it looks a bit asymmetrical. > > Can we use acquire()/release()?
Sure I can change things to use acquire()/release() instead. I will change this for v2. Regards, Hans
