Re: [PATCH RFC v3 3/3] pinctrl: add pinctrl gpio binding support
From: Stephen Warren <hidden>
Date: 2012-05-24 15:22:19
Also in:
linux-arm-kernel, lkml
On 05/23/2012 11:19 PM, Dong Aisheng wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 12:42:19PM +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:quoted
On 05/23/2012 07:42 PM, Dong Aisheng wrote:quoted
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 4:44 AM, Stephen Warren [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 05/23/2012 07:22 AM, Dong Aisheng wrote:quoted
From: Dong Aisheng <redacted> This patch implements a standard common binding for pinctrl gpio ranges. Each SoC can add gpio ranges through device tree by adding a gpio-maps property under their pinctrl devices node with the format: <&gpio $gpio_offset $pin_offset $npin>. Then the pinctrl driver can call pinctrl_dt_add_gpio_ranges(pctldev, node) to parse and register the gpio ranges from device tree.
...
quoted
quoted
quoted
Re: your locking comments in your other email: ranges[i].gc doesn't appear to be used anywhere else in pinctrl, so I think it's OK not to lock the GPIO chip for any more time than between the above two blocks of code.So i will add lock between them like: ranges[i].gc = of_node_to_gpiochip(np_gpio); if (!try_module_get(ranges[i].gc->owner)) err...I think that module_get() needs to happen inside of_node_to_gpiochip(), so that it executes inside any lock that function takes.Can you please help explain a bit more? I did not quite understand. It looks to me of_node_to_gpiochip is only convert the gpio node to gpio chip. Why need get the module inside this function? For gpio_request function, it also calls try_module_get(gc) after find the gpio chip.
The problem is this: Thread 1: Call of_node_to_gpiochip(), returns a gpio_chip. Thread 2: Unregisters the same gpio_chip that was returned above. Thread 1: Accesses the now unregistered (and possibly free'd) gpio_chip -> at best, bad data, at worst, OOPS. In order to prevent this, of_node_to_gpiochip() should take measures to prevent another thread from unregistering the gpio_chip until thread 1 has completed its step above. The existing of_get_named_gpio_flags() is safe from this, since gpiochip_find() acquires the GPIO lock, and all accesses to the fouond gpio chip occur with that lock held, inside the match function. Perhaps a similar approach could be used here.
quoted
quoted
quoted
Finally, just a minor nit:
...
quoted
quoted
quoted
could be slightly simpler:
...
quoted
quoted
Because here still uese np_gpio, Can i still use it after of_node_put?Oh right, that makes sense, yes.I guess you mean no(can not use the node after of_node_put), right?
I mean the original code in your patch is fine.