Date:   Mon, 13 Dec 2021 10:53:36 +0100
From:   Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@collabora.com>
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
Cc:     Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
        Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@kernel.org>,
        linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] mtd: core: protect access to MTD devices while
 in suspend
Message-ID: <20211213105336.7be369b7@collabora.com>
In-Reply-To: <20211213103350.22590c13@xps13>
References: <20211129101908.6f1aa715@xps13>
        <20211129094129.xn364czofrgtvfb4@skn-laptop>
        <63be9121-18c3-1ef2-c448-f99fb861490f@samsung.com>
        <20211130124131.6pgu7enjgk6y536m@skn-laptop>
        <20211130141551.400331c8@collabora.com>
        <20211130132912.v6v45boce2zbnoy3@skn-laptop>
        <20211130143705.5d0404aa@collabora.com>
        <20211203143958.40645506@xps13>
        <20211209140721.6ki7gznvxwyn3cze@skn-laptop.hinnerup>
        <20211209152811.318bdf17@xps13>
        <20211210132535.gy7rqj5zblqlnz5y@skn-laptop.hadsten>
        <20211213101025.42c27b43@xps13>
        <20211213102801.569b50b1@collabora.com>
        <20211213103350.22590c13@xps13>
Organization: Collabora
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 10:33:50 +0100
Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>=20
> boris.brezillon@collabora.com wrote on Mon, 13 Dec 2021 10:28:01 +0100:
>=20
> > On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 10:10:25 +0100
> > Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com> wrote:
> >  =20
> > > Hi Sean,
> > >=20
> > > sean@geanix.com wrote on Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:25:35 +0100:
> > >    =20
> > > > On Thu, Dec 09, 2021 at 03:28:11PM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote:     =
=20
> > > > > Hi Sean,
> > > > >=20
> > > > > sean@geanix.com wrote on Thu, 9 Dec 2021 15:07:21 +0100:
> > > > >        =20
> > > > > > On Fri, Dec 03, 2021 at 02:39:58PM +0100, Miquel Raynal wrote: =
      =20
> > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > >          =20
> > > > > > > > > Fine by me, lets drop this series.         =20
> > > > > > >=20
> > > > > > > FYI I've dropped the entire series from mtd/next. I'm waiting=
 for the
> > > > > > > fix discussed below (without abusing the chip mutex ;-) ).   =
      =20
> > > > > >=20
> > > > > > Cool, looking forward to test a patch series :)       =20
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Test? You mean "write"? :)
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Miqu=C3=A8l       =20
> > > >=20
> > > > Hi Miquel,
> > > >=20
> > > > Should we us a atomic for the suspended variable?     =20
> > >=20
> > > I haven't thought about it extensively, an atomic variable sound fine
> > > but I am definitely not a locking expert...   =20
> >=20
> > No need to use an atomic if the variable is already protected by a lock
> > when accessed, and this seems to be case. =20
>=20
> Maybe there was a confusion about this lock: I think Boris just do not
> want the core to take any lock during a suspend operation. But you can
> still use locks, as long as you release them before suspending.
>=20
> And also, that chip lock might not be the one you want to take because
> it's been introduced for another purpose.

Access to the suspended field is already protected by the chip lock,
and I think it's just fine to keep it this way.