Re: [RFC v5 1/8] platform/x86: intel_pmc_ipc: Use spin_lock to protect GCR updates

[Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan]

Hi Andy,


On 10/8/2017 11:38 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 1:19 AM,
> <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Currently, update_no_reboot_bit() function implemented in this driver
> > uses mutex_lock() to protect its register updates. But this function is
> > called with in atomic context in iTCO_wdt_start() and iTCO_wdt_stop()
> > functions in iTCO_wdt.c driver, which in turn causes "sleeping into
> > atomic context" issue. This patch fixes this issue by replacing the
> > mutex_lock() with spin_lock() to protect the GCR read/write/update APIs.
> >
> > Fixes: 9d855d4 ("platform/x86: intel_pmc_ipc: Fix iTCO_wdt GCS memory mapping failure")
> > Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kupuswamy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >   * Rebased this patch on top of Andy's review branch.
> Oh, what I asked you is to use vanilla kernel as a base.
> Please, be sure (you assured me, though it's not true)
I did test this patch on top of 4.14-rc3, but I have included another 
patch (""platform/x86: intel_pmc_ipc: Use devm_* calls in driver probe 
function") from your review branch before testing.
I assumed that your will be pushing this patch along with devm_* fixes 
patch (since you already reviewed it), So I re-based them together on 
top of 4.14-rc3. Sorry, it looks like my assumption is incorrect.
>   that it's
> applied against vanilla (or our fixes branch) and send just this one
> patch separately.
I will send it separately now.
> No need to resend v5 right now.