On 10/21/2015 06:14 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 05:37:45PM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>> Like the change made for mv88e6xxx, use mutex_lock_nested() to avoid
>> lockdep to give false positives because of nested MDIO busses.
>
> Hi Neil
>
> We now have three instances of
On 10/21/2015 06:14 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 05:37:45PM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>> Like the change made for mv88e6xxx, use mutex_lock_nested() to avoid
>> lockdep to give false positives because of nested MDIO busses.
>
> Hi Neil
>
> We now have three instances of
Hi Andrew,
On 10/21/2015 06:14 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 05:37:45PM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>> Like the change made for mv88e6xxx, use mutex_lock_nested() to avoid
>> lockdep to give false positives because of nested MDIO busses.
>
> Hi Neil
>
> We now have three
> Well, mdio-mux also calls switch_fn inside the mdio_lock, clean refactoring
> would introduce a separate lock and call the nested variants.
> Is that ok ? Can someone test mdio-mux if I make the change ?
Hi Neil
I would not touch mdio-mux. As you said, it does more than lock, read,
unlock. It
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 05:37:45PM +0200, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> Like the change made for mv88e6xxx, use mutex_lock_nested() to avoid
> lockdep to give false positives because of nested MDIO busses.
Hi Neil
We now have three instances of this, since mdio-mux.c has the same
code. Maybe now would
Like the change made for mv88e6xxx, use mutex_lock_nested() to avoid
lockdep to give false positives because of nested MDIO busses.
The false positive was observed using a mv88e6060 from a TI816X SoC.
Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong
---
drivers/net/dsa/mv88e6060.c | 19