On Thu, 11 Jul 2024, Herve Codina wrote:

Hi Markus,

On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 18:09:26 +0200
Markus Elfring [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

…

quoted

+++ b/drivers/mfd/syscon.c  

…

quoted

+static struct syscon *syscon_from_regmap(struct regmap *regmap)  

+{

quoted

+	struct syscon *entry, *syscon = NULL;
+
+	spin_lock(&syscon_list_slock);
+
+	list_for_each_entry(entry, &syscon_list, list)  

…

quoted

+	spin_unlock(&syscon_list_slock);
+
+	return syscon;
+}  

…

Under which circumstances would you become interested to apply a statement
like “guard(spinlock)(&syscon_list_slock);”?
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.10-rc7/source/include/linux/spinlock.h#L561

I used the spin_{lock,unlock}() pattern call already present in syscon.c.
Of course, I can add a new patch in this series converting syscon.c to
the guard() family and use guard() in my introduced lock/unlock.

Lee, any opinion ?

I'm intentionally leaving this one for Arnd.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]