This patch removes the exchange_lock sempahore. Its intended function
was two-fold:

a) Lock the remove() callback of the driver against the ISR, so that
   the resources only go away after the ISR has finished. This is
   unnecessary though, because `rm_lock' does that already, in
   combination with the nullification of `scontext->ddev'.

b) Indicate whether a command was sent previously. If the semaphore
   is found unused in the threaded ISR, an error is reported.
   This case can be handled much nicer by checking whether `skb_resp'
   is present in the context. For this, nullify the `skb_resp' pointer
   in the callback context after it was sent back to the NFC core.

Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack <dan...@zonque.org>
---
 drivers/nfc/st95hf/core.c | 52 +++++++--------------------------------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/nfc/st95hf/core.c b/drivers/nfc/st95hf/core.c
index d857197ec7b2..6761ab90f68d 100644
--- a/drivers/nfc/st95hf/core.c
+++ b/drivers/nfc/st95hf/core.c
@@ -214,8 +214,6 @@ struct st95_digital_cmd_complete_arg {
  * @st95hf_supply: regulator "consumer" for NFC device.
  * @sendrcv_trflag: last byte of frame send by sendrecv command
  *     of st95hf. This byte contains transmission flag info.
- * @exchange_lock: semaphore used for signaling the st95hf_remove
- *     function that the last outstanding async nfc request is finished.
  * @rm_lock: mutex for ensuring safe access of nfc digital object
  *     from threaded ISR. Usage of this mutex avoids any race between
  *     deletion of the object from st95hf_remove() and its access from
@@ -233,7 +231,6 @@ struct st95hf_context {
        struct st95_digital_cmd_complete_arg complete_cb_arg;
        struct regulator *st95hf_supply;
        unsigned char sendrcv_trflag;
-       struct semaphore exchange_lock;
        struct mutex rm_lock;
        u8 current_protocol;
        u8 current_rf_tech;
@@ -785,29 +782,14 @@ static irqreturn_t st95hf_irq_thread_handler(int irq, 
void  *st95hfcontext)
        struct st95_digital_cmd_complete_arg *cb_arg;
 
        spidevice = &stcontext->spicontext.spidev->dev;
+       cb_arg = &stcontext->complete_cb_arg;
+       skb_resp = cb_arg->skb_resp;
 
-       /*
-        * check semaphore, if not down() already, then we don't
-        * know in which context the ISR is called and surely it
-        * will be a bug. Note that down() of the semaphore is done
-        * in the corresponding st95hf_in_send_cmd() and then
-        * only this ISR should be called. ISR will up() the
-        * semaphore before leaving. Hence when the ISR is called
-        * the correct behaviour is down_trylock() should always
-        * return 1 (indicating semaphore cant be taken and hence no
-        * change in semaphore count).
-        * If not, then we up() the semaphore and crash on
-        * a BUG() !
-        */
-       if (!down_trylock(&stcontext->exchange_lock)) {
-               up(&stcontext->exchange_lock);
+       if (unlikely(!skb_resp)) {
                WARN(1, "unknown context in ST95HF ISR");
                return IRQ_NONE;
        }
 
-       cb_arg = &stcontext->complete_cb_arg;
-       skb_resp = cb_arg->skb_resp;
-
        mutex_lock(&stcontext->rm_lock);
        res_len = st95hf_spi_recv_response(&stcontext->spicontext,
                                           skb_resp->data);
@@ -856,8 +838,13 @@ static irqreturn_t st95hf_irq_thread_handler(int irq, void 
 *st95hfcontext)
        /* call digital layer callback */
        cb_arg->complete_cb(stcontext->ddev, cb_arg->cb_usrarg, skb_resp);
 
+       /*
+        * This skb is now owned by the core layer.
+        * Make sure not to use it again.
+        */
+       cb_arg->skb_resp = NULL;
+
        /* up the semaphore before returning */
-       up(&stcontext->exchange_lock);
        mutex_unlock(&stcontext->rm_lock);
 
        return IRQ_HANDLED;
@@ -868,8 +855,6 @@ static irqreturn_t st95hf_irq_thread_handler(int irq, void  
*st95hfcontext)
        skb_resp = ERR_PTR(result);
        /* call of callback with error */
        cb_arg->complete_cb(stcontext->ddev, cb_arg->cb_usrarg, skb_resp);
-       /* up the semaphore before returning */
-       up(&stcontext->exchange_lock);
        mutex_unlock(&stcontext->rm_lock);
        return IRQ_HANDLED;
 }
@@ -965,25 +950,12 @@ static int st95hf_in_send_cmd(struct nfc_digital_dev 
*ddev,
            ddev->curr_protocol == NFC_PROTO_ISO14443)
                stcontext->complete_cb_arg.rats = true;
 
-       /*
-        * down the semaphore to indicate to remove func that an
-        * ISR is pending, note that it will not block here in any case.
-        * If found blocked, it is a BUG!
-        */
-       rc = down_killable(&stcontext->exchange_lock);
-       if (rc) {
-               WARN(1, "Semaphore is not found up in st95hf_in_send_cmd\n");
-               return rc;
-       }
-
        rc = st95hf_spi_send(&stcontext->spicontext, skb->data,
                             skb->len,
                             ASYNC);
        if (rc) {
                dev_err(&stcontext->nfcdev->dev,
                        "Error %d trying to perform data_exchange", rc);
-               /* up the semaphore since ISR will never come in this case */
-               up(&stcontext->exchange_lock);
                goto free_skb_resp;
        }
 
@@ -1104,7 +1076,6 @@ static int st95hf_probe(struct spi_device *nfc_spi_dev)
                }
        }
 
-       sema_init(&st95context->exchange_lock, 1);
        init_completion(&spicontext->done);
        mutex_init(&spicontext->spi_lock);
        mutex_init(&st95context->rm_lock);
@@ -1220,11 +1191,6 @@ static int st95hf_remove(struct spi_device *nfc_spi_dev)
 
        mutex_unlock(&stcontext->rm_lock);
 
-       /* if last in_send_cmd's ISR is pending, wait for it to finish */
-       result = down_killable(&stcontext->exchange_lock);
-       if (result == -EINTR)
-               dev_err(&spictx->spidev->dev, "sleep for semaphore interrupted 
by signal\n");
-
        /* next reset the ST95HF controller */
        result = st95hf_spi_send(&stcontext->spicontext,
                                 &reset_cmd,
-- 
2.17.1

Reply via email to