> -----Original Message----- > From: Arnd Bergmann [mailto:arnd@xxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, August 06, 2012 7:57 PM > To: Liu Qiang-B32616 > Cc: linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx; vinod.koul@xxxxxxxxx; Phillips Kim-R1AAHA; > herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; > gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Li Yang-R58472; Tabi Timur-B04825 > Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/8] fsl-dma: use spin_lock_bh to instead of > spin_lock_irqsave > > On Monday 06 August 2012, qiang.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > > From: Qiang Liu <qiang.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > The use of spin_lock_irqsave() is a stronger locking mechanism than is > > required throughout the driver. The minimum locking required should be > > used instead. Interrupts will be turned off and context will be saved, > > there is needless to use irqsave. > > > > Change all instances of spin_lock_irqsave() to spin_lock_bh(). > > All manipulation of protected fields is done using tasklet context or > > weaker, which makes spin_lock_bh() the correct choice. > > > > Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@xxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Li Yang <leoli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Cc: Timur Tabi <timur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Qiang Liu <qiang.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Acked-by: Ira W. Snyder <iws@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> > > You could actually change the use of spin_lock_bh inside of the tasklet > function (dma_do_tasklet) do just spin_lock(), because softirqs are > already disabled there, but your version is also ok. Yes, you are right, it will disable softirq. Thank you very much. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
