Return-Path: Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 14:26:18 +0300 From: Andrei Emeltchenko To: Gustavo Padovan , linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFCv2 08/20] Bluetooth: AMP: Remote AMP ctrl definitions Message-ID: <20120725112616.GE2056@aemeltch-MOBL1> References: <1340981212-21709-1-git-send-email-Andrei.Emeltchenko.news@gmail.com> <1343136121-22476-1-git-send-email-Andrei.Emeltchenko.news@gmail.com> <1343136121-22476-9-git-send-email-Andrei.Emeltchenko.news@gmail.com> <20120724211342.GF20029@joana> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20120724211342.GF20029@joana> Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Gustavo, On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 06:13:42PM -0300, Gustavo Padovan wrote: > > diff --git a/include/net/bluetooth/a2mp.h b/include/net/bluetooth/a2mp.h > > index 012f573..8ba236c 100644 > > --- a/include/net/bluetooth/a2mp.h > > +++ b/include/net/bluetooth/a2mp.h > > @@ -29,6 +29,9 @@ struct amp_mgr { > > > > struct list_head phy_links; > > struct mutex phy_links_lock; > > + > > + struct list_head amp_ctrls; > > + struct mutex amp_ctrls_lock; > > Have you checked for RCU here, are they worthwhile? and why is it better than > spinlocks? This is for both locks above. I want to be able to sleep inside critical section and using RCU is overkill here. Best regards Andrei Emeltchenko