memory/samsung: reduce unnecessary mutex lock area

Message ID 20200508131338.32956-1-bernard@vivo.com
State New
Headers show
Series
  • memory/samsung: reduce unnecessary mutex lock area
Related show

Commit Message

Bernard Zhao May 8, 2020, 1:13 p.m.
Maybe dmc->df->lock is unnecessary to protect function
exynos5_dmc_perf_events_check(dmc). If we have to protect,
dmc->lock is more better and more effective.
Also, it seems not needed to protect "if (ret) & dev_warn"
branch.

Signed-off-by: Bernard Zhao <bernard@vivo.com>
---
 drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c | 6 ++----
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c b/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c
index 22a43d662833..88e8ac8b5327 100644
--- a/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c
+++ b/drivers/memory/samsung/exynos5422-dmc.c
@@ -1345,16 +1345,14 @@  static irqreturn_t dmc_irq_thread(int irq, void *priv)
 	int res;
 	struct exynos5_dmc *dmc = priv;
 
-	mutex_lock(&dmc->df->lock);
-
 	exynos5_dmc_perf_events_check(dmc);
 
+	mutex_lock(&dmc->df->lock);
 	res = update_devfreq(dmc->df);
+	mutex_unlock(&dmc->df->lock);
 	if (res)
 		dev_warn(dmc->dev, "devfreq failed with %d\n", res);
 
-	mutex_unlock(&dmc->df->lock);
-
 	return IRQ_HANDLED;
 }