Searched hist:"5 ac64ba1" (Results 1 – 1 of 1) sorted by relevance
| /openbmc/linux/drivers/media/dvb-frontends/ |
| H A D | dib8000.c | 5ac64ba1 Fri Dec 13 07:35:03 CST 2013 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@samsung.com> [media] dib8000: make 32 bits read atomic
As the dvb-frontend kthread can be called anytime, it can race
with some get status ioctl. So, it seems better to avoid one to
race with the other while reading a 32 bits register.
I can't see any other reason for having a mutex there at I2C, except
to provide such kind of protection, as the I2C core already has a
mutex to protect I2C transfers.
Note: instead of this approach, it could eventually remove the dib8000
specific mutex for it, and either group the 4 ops into one xfer or
to manually control the I2C mutex. The main advantage of the current
approach is that the changes are smaller and more puntual.
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@samsung.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@samsung.com>
Acked-by: Patrick Boettcher <pboettcher@kernellabs.com>
5ac64ba1 Fri Dec 13 07:35:03 CST 2013 Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@samsung.com> [media] dib8000: make 32 bits read atomic
As the dvb-frontend kthread can be called anytime, it can race
with some get status ioctl. So, it seems better to avoid one to
race with the other while reading a 32 bits register.
I can't see any other reason for having a mutex there at I2C, except
to provide such kind of protection, as the I2C core already has a
mutex to protect I2C transfers.
Note: instead of this approach, it could eventually remove the dib8000
specific mutex for it, and either group the 4 ops into one xfer or
to manually control the I2C mutex. The main advantage of the current
approach is that the changes are smaller and more puntual.
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@samsung.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <m.chehab@samsung.com>
Acked-by: Patrick Boettcher <pboettcher@kernellabs.com>
|