Hi Chris,
On 8/29/2017 3:21 AM, Chris Lew wrote:
Hi Sricharan,
Minor bug in this patch.
On 8/24/2017 12:21 AM, Sricharan R wrote:
[..]
quoted
@@ -829,11 +839,14 @@ static int qcom_glink_rx_open(struct qcom_glink *glink, unsigned int rcid,
????? struct device_node *node;
????? int lcid;
????? int ret;
+??? unsigned long flags;
? +??? spin_lock_irqsave(&glink->idr_lock, flags);
????? idr_for_each_entry(&glink->lcids, channel, lcid) {
????????? if (!strcmp(channel->name, name))
????????????? break;
????? }
+??? spin_unlock_irqrestore(&glink->idr_lock, flags);
? ????? if (!channel) {
????????? channel = qcom_glink_alloc_channel(glink, name);@@ -844,15 +857,15 @@ static int qcom_glink_rx_open(struct qcom_glink *glink, unsigned int rcid,
????????? create_device = true;
????? }
? -??? mutex_lock(&glink->idr_lock);
+??? spin_lock_irqsave(&glink->idr_lock, flags);
????? ret = idr_alloc(&glink->rcids, channel, rcid, rcid + 1, GFP_KERNEL);
I think GFP_KERNEL should be changed to GFP_ATOMIC if the mutex is changed to spinlock.
ha, thanks for the catch.
Regards,
Sricharan
--
"QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus