>> 1) curr_level of the shared_resource is not updated in
>> update_resource_level
>
>Yes, its not. Its done as part of the platform specific change_level call.
[Romit] Kindly see below. I was thinking that it is better that we do not
access any fields of struct shared_resource from outside this file. Would the
line below solve the problem?
>> >+static int update_resource_level(struct shared_resource *resp)
>> >+{
>> >+ struct users_list *user;
>> >+ unsigned long target_level;
>> >+ int ret;
>> >+
>> >+ /* Regenerate the target_value for the resource */
>> >+ target_level = RES_DEFAULTLEVEL;
>> >+ list_for_each_entry(user, &resp->users_list, node)
>> >+ if (user->level > target_level)
>> >+ target_level = user->level;
>> >+
>> >+ pr_debug("SRF: Changing Level for resource %s to %ld\n",
>> >+ resp->name, target_level);
>> >+ ret = resp->ops->change_level(resp, target_level);
>> >+ if (ret) {
>> >+ printk(KERN_ERR "Unable to Change"
>> >+ "level for resource
>> %s to %ld\n",
>> >+ resp->name, target_level);
>> >+ } else
resp->curr_level = target_level; /* [Romit] Should be done
here.*/
>> >+ return ret;
>> >+}
>
>> 2) resource_request invokes spin_lock_irqsave and then if it
>> is a request for a new device it invokes get_user().
>> get_user() calls kmalloc with GFP_KERNEL. So it can sleep.
>> Hence you will sleep with spinlocks held!!
>
>Right, so I'll probably have to add a GFP_ATOMIC flag to that.
>I am now thinking If I really need spinlocks, think I can do with mutex's
>instead.
>The spinlocks were put in place to take care of the omap-pm hooks from
>clock f/w which no longer seem to be needed.
[Romit] Trying to review the rest of the patches in the patchset to get a
better picture.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
