Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Mon, 10 Aug 2020 18:12:16 +0200
From:   =?iso-8859-2?Q?Micha=B3_Miros=B3aw?= <mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl>
To:     Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
Cc:     Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: simplify locking
Message-ID: <20200810161216.GB1100@qmqm.qmqm.pl>
References: <b22fadc413fd7a1f4018c2c9dc261abf837731cb.1597007683.git.mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl>
 <40871bc7-2d6c-10d4-53b3-0aded21edf3b@gmail.com>
 <20200809223030.GB5522@qmqm.qmqm.pl>
 <8850c09f-4b24-7ab2-a0f7-e0d752f5a404@gmail.com>
 <20200810005927.GA13107@qmqm.qmqm.pl>
 <dc398754-f31e-9703-01b1-fec2d3a381cf@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <dc398754-f31e-9703-01b1-fec2d3a381cf@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 08:14:20AM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 10.08.2020 03:59, Michał Mirosław пишет:
> > On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 03:21:47AM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> >> 10.08.2020 01:30, Michał Mirosław пишет:
> >>> On Mon, Aug 10, 2020 at 12:40:04AM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> >>>> 10.08.2020 00:16, Michał Mirosław пишет:
[...]
> >>>>> -	mutex_lock(&regulator_nesting_mutex);
> >>>>> +	if (ww_ctx || !mutex_trylock_recursive(&rdev->mutex.base))
[...]
> >>> I think that reimplementing the function just to not use it is not the
> >>> right solution. The whole locking protocol is problematic and this patch
> >>> just uncovers one side of it.
> >>
> >> It's not clear to me what is uncovered, the ref_cnt was always accessed
> >> under lock. Could you please explain in a more details?
[...]
> The nested locking usage is discouraged in general because it is a
> source of bugs. I guess it should be possible to get rid of all nested
> lockings in the regulator core and use a pure ww_mutex, but somebody
> should dedicate time to work on it.

So using a deprecated function for deprecated functionality sounds just
appropriate, doesn't it? :-)

Best Regards,
Michał Mirosław