Hi Krzysztof,
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 8:23 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski
<k.kozlow...@samsung.com> wrote:
> Add lockdep_assert_held_once() to functions explicitly mentioning that
> rdev or regulator_list mutex must be held. Using WARN_ONCE shouldn't
> pollute the dmesg to much.
>
> The patch (if CONFIG_LOCKDEP enabled) will show warnings in certain
> regulators calling regulator_notifier_call_chain() without rdev->mutex
> held.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlow...@samsung.com>
>
> ---
>
> Warnings for missing locks when calling regulator_notifier_call_chain()
> should appear on many regulators except wm8350-regulator.c, e.g.:
> da9055-regulator.c, da9062-regulator.c, da9063-regulator.c,
> da9211-regulator.c, wm831x-dcdc.c and few more.
>
> The question is whether the lock during that call should be held?
That was a (so far, not counting the "Applied, thanks!") unanswered question?
For the first time ever, I got:
drivers/regulator/core.c:3480 regulator_notifier_call_chain+0x54/0x80()
due to da9210_irq_handler() not taking the mutex.
Drivers calling regulator_notifier_call_chain() from a threaded interrupt
handler should be OK calling mutex_lock().
Does anyone have plans to fix all affected drivers?
Thanks!
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- ge...@linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
