Le 03/09/2024 à 09:36, Ye Zhang a écrit :
> Replacing mutex_lock with guard() simplifies the code and helps avoid
> deadlocks.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ye Zhang <ye.zhang@rock-chips.com>
> ---
> drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c | 14 +++++---------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c
> index 73e57efb46fc..d5c57617fc86 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c
> @@ -765,20 +765,19 @@ static int rockchip_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> }
> }
>
> - ret = rockchip_get_bank_data(bank);
> - if (ret)
> - goto err_disabled_clk;
> -
> /*
> * Prevent clashes with a deferred output setting
> * being added right at this moment.
> */
> - mutex_lock(&bank->deferred_lock);
> + guard(mutex)(&bank->deferred_lock);
> + ret = rockchip_get_bank_data(bank);
rockchip_get_bank_data() was out of the lock before, now it is inside.
It looks ok, but is it on purpose? If so, maybe it could be mentioned or
explained why in the changelog ?
CJ
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_disabled_clk;
>
> ret = rockchip_gpiolib_register(bank);
> if (ret) {
> dev_err(bank->dev, "Failed to register gpio %d\n", ret);
> - goto err_unlock;
> + goto err_disabled_clk;
> }
>
> while (!list_empty(&bank->deferred_pins)) {
> @@ -805,14 +804,11 @@ static int rockchip_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> kfree(cfg);
> }
>
> - mutex_unlock(&bank->deferred_lock);
>
> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, bank);
> dev_info(dev, "probed %pOF\n", np);
>
> return 0;
> -err_unlock:
> - mutex_unlock(&bank->deferred_lock);
> err_disabled_clk:
> if (bank->manual_clk_release)
> clk_disable_unprepare(bank->clk);