On 09/10/2025, Shengjiu Wang wrote: > Hi > > On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 2:39 PM Maxime Ripard <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Sep 03, 2025 at 06:41:05PM +0800, Shengjiu Wang wrote: >>> On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 12:52 AM Luca Ceresoli <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hello Shengjiu, >>>> >>>> On Thu, 21 Aug 2025 15:31:28 +0800 >>>> Shengjiu Wang <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Add API dw_hdmi_set_sample_iec958() for IEC958 format because audio device >>>>> driver needs IEC958 information to configure this specific setting. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Shengjiu Wang <[email protected]> >>>>> Acked-by: Liu Ying <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> [...] >>>> >>>>> +void dw_hdmi_set_sample_iec958(struct dw_hdmi *hdmi, unsigned int iec958) >>>>> +{ >>>>> + mutex_lock(&hdmi->audio_mutex); >>>>> + hdmi->sample_iec958 = iec958; >>>>> + mutex_unlock(&hdmi->audio_mutex); >>>>> +} >>>> >>>> Apologies for jumping in the discussion as late as in v5, but I noticed >>>> this patch and I was wondering whether this mutex_lock/unlock() is >>>> really needed, as you're copying an int. >>> >>> Thanks for your comments. >>> >>> Seems it is not necessary to add mutex here. I just follow the code as >>> other similar functions. I will send a new version to update it. >> >> Let's not be smart about it. Next thing you know, someone will add >> another field in there that would absolutely require a mutex and now >> you're not race free anymore. >> >> Unless there's a real concern, the mutex must stay. >> > > Ok, thanks for comments. Then Patch v6 need to be dropped.
To properly track the changelog with patchwork, can you send v7 to add the mutex? > > Is there any other comments for this Patch v5? > If no, can this series be accepted? > > Best regards > Shengjiu Wang -- Regards, Liu Ying
