On Thu, 2013-01-17 at 01:06 +0000, Kim, Milo wrote:
> @@ -242,17 +233,15 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(led_trigger_unregister);
>  void led_trigger_event(struct led_trigger *trig,
>                       enum led_brightness brightness)
>  {
> -     struct list_head *entry;
> +     struct led_classdev *led_cdev;
>  
>       if (!trig)
>               return;
>  
>       read_lock(&trig->leddev_list_lock);
> -     list_for_each(entry, &trig->led_cdevs) {
> -             struct led_classdev *led_cdev;
> -
> -             led_cdev = list_entry(entry, struct led_classdev, trig_list);
> -             led_set_brightness(led_cdev, brightness);
> +     list_for_each_entry(led_cdev, &leds_list, node) {
> +             if (led_cdev->trigger == trig)
> +                     led_set_brightness(led_cdev, brightness);
>       }
>       read_unlock(&trig->leddev_list_lock);

Continuing to use trig->leddev_list_lock doesn't seem right.  Shouldn't
traversal of leds_list be guarded by the leds_list_lock rwsem?  And if
so, is it safe to use a potentially-blocking lock in this context?


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to