Em Wed, 11 Apr 2018 18:03:15 +0200
Daniel Scheller <d.scheller....@gmail.com> escreveu:
> Am Wed, 11 Apr 2018 08:03:37 -0400
> schrieb Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mche...@s-opensource.com>:
>
> > Currently, ddbridge produces 4 warnings on sparse:
> > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-core.c:495:9: warning: context
> > imbalance in 'ddb_output_start' - different lock contexts for basic block
> > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-core.c:510:9: warning: context
> > imbalance in 'ddb_output_stop' - different lock contexts for basic block
> > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-core.c:525:9: warning: context
> > imbalance in 'ddb_input_stop' - different lock contexts for basic block
> > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-core.c:560:9: warning: context
> > imbalance in 'ddb_input_start' - different lock contexts for basic block
> >
> > Those are all false positives, but they result from the fact that
> > there could potentially have some troubles at the locking schema,
> > because the lock depends on a var (output->dma).
> >
> > I discussed that in priv with Sparse author and with the current
> > maintainer. Both believe that sparse is doing the right thing, and
> > that the proper fix would be to change the code to make it clearer
> > that, when spin_lock_irq() is called, spin_unlock_irq() will be
> > also called.
> >
> > That help not only static analyzers to better understand the code,
> > but also humans that could need to take a look at the code.
> >
> > It was also pointed that gcc would likely be smart enough to
> > optimize the code and produce the same result. I double
> > checked: indeed, the size of the driver didn't change after
> > this patch.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mche...@s-opensource.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-core.c | 43
> > ++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-core.c
> > b/drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-core.c
> > index 4a2819d3e225..080e2189ca7f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/pci/ddbridge/ddbridge-core.c
> > @@ -458,13 +458,12 @@ static void calc_con(struct ddb_output *output, u32
> > *con, u32 *con2, u32 flags)
> > *con2 = (nco << 16) | gap;
> > }
> >
> > -static void ddb_output_start(struct ddb_output *output)
> > +static void __ddb_output_start(struct ddb_output *output)
> > {
> > struct ddb *dev = output->port->dev;
> > u32 con = 0x11c, con2 = 0;
> >
> > if (output->dma) {
> > - spin_lock_irq(&output->dma->lock);
> > output->dma->cbuf = 0;
> > output->dma->coff = 0;
> > output->dma->stat = 0;
> > @@ -492,9 +491,18 @@ static void ddb_output_start(struct ddb_output *output)
> >
> > ddbwritel(dev, con | 1, TS_CONTROL(output));
> >
> > - if (output->dma) {
> > + if (output->dma)
> > output->dma->running = 1;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void ddb_output_start(struct ddb_output *output)
> > +{
> > + if (output->dma) {
> > + spin_lock_irq(&output->dma->lock);
> > + __ddb_output_start(output);
> > spin_unlock_irq(&output->dma->lock);
> > + } else {
> > + __ddb_output_start(output);
> > }
> > }
>
> This makes things look rather strange (at least to my eyes), especially
> when simply trying to satisfy automated checkers, which in this case is
> useless since both lock and unlock will always happen based on the same
> condition ([input|output]->dma != NULL). Though I agree having the
> locking inside a condition in it's current form isn't optimal, too, and
> I also already thought about this in the past.
>
> I'd rather try to fix this by checking for the dma ptrs at the
> beginning of the four functions and immediately return if the ptr is
> invalid. Though I don't know if this may cause side effects as there's
> data written to the regs pointed by the TS_CONTROL() macros even if
> there's no dma ptr present.
>
> I'd like to hear Ralph's opinion on this, and also like to have this
> changed (in whatever way) in the upstream (dddvb) repository, too.
>
> Please refrain from applying this patch until we agreed on a proper
> solution that works for everyone.
Yeah, sure.
Btw, does ddbridge driver works without DMA? On a quick look, it
seems that it is enabled all the times.
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel Scheller
Thanks,
Mauro
