[PATCH] memory/samsung: reduce unnecessary mutex lock area

[Bernard Zhao]

Maybe dmc->df->lock is unnecessary to protect function
exynos5_dmc_perf_events_check(dmc). If we have to protect,
dmc->lock is more better and more effective.
Also, it seems not needed to protect "if (ret) & dev_warn"
branch.

Signed-off-by: Bernard Zhao <bern...@vivo.com>
---
 drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c | 6 ++----
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c 
b/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c
index 22a43d662833..88e8ac8b5327 100644
--- a/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c
+++ b/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c
@@ -1345,16 +1345,14 @@ static irqreturn_t dmc_irq_thread(int irq, void *priv)
        int res;
        struct exynos5_dmc *dmc = priv;
 
-       mutex_lock(&dmc->df->lock);
-
        exynos5_dmc_perf_events_check(dmc);
 
+       mutex_lock(&dmc->df->lock);
        res = update_devfreq(dmc->df);
+       mutex_unlock(&dmc->df->lock);
        if (res)
                dev_warn(dmc->dev, "devfreq failed with %d\n", res);
 
-       mutex_unlock(&dmc->df->lock);
-
        return IRQ_HANDLED;
 }
 
-- 
2.26.2