On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 01:54:00PM +0530, Oza Pawandeep wrote:
> This patch protects pci_do_recovery with mutex.

pcie_do_recovery()

Please explain why the mutex is necessary.  What bad things happen
without the mutex?

You named (some) of the other things "pcie"; maybe use "pcie" in the
mutex name as well so they look the same.

> Signed-off-by: Oza Pawandeep <p...@codeaurora.org>
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/pcie-err.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/pcie-err.c
> index fcd5add..f830975 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/pcie-err.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/pcie-err.c
> @@ -20,6 +20,8 @@
>  #include <linux/pcieport_if.h>
>  #include "portdrv.h"
>  
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(pci_err_recovery_lock);
> +
>  struct aer_broadcast_data {
>       enum pci_channel_state state;
>       enum pci_ers_result result;
> @@ -283,6 +285,8 @@ void pcie_do_recovery(struct pci_dev *dev, int severity)
>       pci_ers_result_t status, result = PCI_ERS_RESULT_RECOVERED;
>       enum pci_channel_state state;
>  
> +     mutex_lock(&pci_err_recovery_lock);
> +
>       if (severity == AER_FATAL)
>               state = pci_channel_io_frozen;
>       else
> @@ -326,9 +330,11 @@ void pcie_do_recovery(struct pci_dev *dev, int severity)
>                               report_resume);
>  
>       dev_info(&dev->dev, "Device recovery successful\n");
> +     mutex_unlock(&pci_err_recovery_lock);
>       return;
>  
>  failed:
>       /* TODO: Should kernel panic here? */
>       dev_info(&dev->dev, "Device recovery failed\n");
> +     mutex_unlock(&pci_err_recovery_lock);
>  }
> -- 
> Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. as an affiliate of Qualcomm 
> Technologies, Inc.,
> a Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux 
> Foundation Collaborative Project.
> 

Reply via email to