Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Fri, 23 Mar 2018 12:42:54 +0100
From:   Valentin Vidic <Valentin.Vidic@CARNet.hr>
To:     Marcus Wolf <marcus.wolf@smarthome-wolf.de>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Simon =?iso-8859-1?Q?Sandstr=F6m?= <simon@nikanor.nu>,
        Marcus Wolf <linux@Wolf-Entwicklungen.de>,
        Luca =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=F6the?= <luca@acul.me>,
        Marcin Ciupak <marcin.s.ciupak@gmail.com>,
        Michael Panzlaff <michael.panzlaff@fau.de>,
        Derek Robson <robsonde@gmail.com>, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Message-ID: <20180323114254.GL31333@gavran.carpriv.carnet.hr>
References: <20180323094725.4904-1-Valentin.Vidic@CARNet.hr>
 <d263c605-f652-fe24-2034-c699f2d27693@smarthome-wolf.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <d263c605-f652-fe24-2034-c699f2d27693@smarthome-wolf.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.3 (2018-01-21)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: pi433: add descriptions for mutex locks
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 11:22:39AM +0100, Marcus Wolf wrote:
> could you please decribe in short words, why you think, that hte lock
> isn't obsolete?
> 
> I wasn't sure, but close to remove the lock. That's why I putted the
> comment.

Sure, if pi433_tx_thread runs on one CPU it might be possible
to call pi433_write concurrently on another CPU and they would
both modify tx_fifo.  But maybe there is some other protection
in place that would prevent this?

-- 
Valentin