On Sun, Feb 25, 2018 at 02:00:43PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> Am 03.02.2018 um 21:17 schrieb Andrew Lunn:
> > On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 05:41:54PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> >> This commit forces callers of phy_resume() and phy_suspend() to hold
> >> mutex phydev->lock. This was done for ca
Am 03.02.2018 um 21:17 schrieb Andrew Lunn:
> On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 05:41:54PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> This commit forces callers of phy_resume() and phy_suspend() to hold
>> mutex phydev->lock. This was done for calls to phy_resume() and
>> phy_suspend() in phylib, however there are mor
> Maybe a better solution now would be to restore phy_resume()'s lock-
> taking behaviour, and provide a lockless __phy_resume() which can be
> used internally within phylib. This means drivers using phy_resume()
> would see no change. Maybe something like (untested):
Hi Russell
I was thinking
On Mon, Feb 05, 2018 at 10:48:55PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> Am 04.02.2018 um 03:48 schrieb Florian Fainelli:
> >
> >
> > On 02/03/2018 03:58 PM, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> >> Am 03.02.2018 um 21:17 schrieb Andrew Lunn:
> >>> On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 05:41:54PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>
Am 04.02.2018 um 03:48 schrieb Florian Fainelli:
>
>
> On 02/03/2018 03:58 PM, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> Am 03.02.2018 um 21:17 schrieb Andrew Lunn:
>>> On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 05:41:54PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
This commit forces callers of phy_resume() and phy_suspend() to hold
On 02/03/2018 03:58 PM, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> Am 03.02.2018 um 21:17 schrieb Andrew Lunn:
>> On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 05:41:54PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>> This commit forces callers of phy_resume() and phy_suspend() to hold
>>> mutex phydev->lock. This was done for calls to phy_resume()
Am 03.02.2018 um 21:17 schrieb Andrew Lunn:
> On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 05:41:54PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>> This commit forces callers of phy_resume() and phy_suspend() to hold
>> mutex phydev->lock. This was done for calls to phy_resume() and
>> phy_suspend() in phylib, however there are mor
On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 05:41:54PM +0100, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> This commit forces callers of phy_resume() and phy_suspend() to hold
> mutex phydev->lock. This was done for calls to phy_resume() and
> phy_suspend() in phylib, however there are more callers in network
> drivers. I'd assume that t
This commit forces callers of phy_resume() and phy_suspend() to hold
mutex phydev->lock. This was done for calls to phy_resume() and
phy_suspend() in phylib, however there are more callers in network
drivers. I'd assume that these other calls issue a warning now
because of the lock not being held.
