[PATCH] MXS: Convert mutexes in clock.c to spinlocks
Russell King - ARM Linux
linux at arm.linux.org.uk
Mon Dec 19 03:22:25 EST 2011
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 05:03:45AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 03:06:13PM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > The mutexes can't be safely used under certain circumstances. I noticed
> > > this
> >
> > > issue during some network instability at home:
> > Yes, this is a known issue. And there was some discussion[1] about
> > why mutex is needed.
>
> Thanks for pointing this out, I was unaware of it.
>
> > But I really have not thought about why we can
> > not use spinlock only, since using mutex only leads to the issue we
> > are seeing here, and using spinlock in enable/disable and mutex in
> > rate/parent will not work, because the mxs clocks have enable/disable
> > and rate/parent functions access the same register. I know it's not
> > good to hold spinlock in rate/parent functions for a long time, but
> > do we have a way around rather than using spinlock for both sets of
> > functions?
>
> Yea, spinlock is not good either. On the other hand, is it really held for so
> long ?
There is another solution to this, which I've pointed out before when
this has come up:
1. Convert all your drivers to _also_ use clk_prepare()/clk_unprepare().
You need to do this anyway as it will become mandatory for the common
clk stuff.
2. Rename your existing clk_enable()/clk_disable() implementation to
clk_prepare()/clk_unprepare(). Ensure CONFIG_HAVE_CLK_PREPARE is
selected.
3. Provide a new no-op clk_enable()/clk_disable() functions.
This fixes the issue because clk_prepare()/clk_unprepare() must only be
called from process contexts, whereas clk_enable()/clk_disable() may be
called from atomic contexts as well.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list