Am Mittwoch, den 04.04.2007, 23:29 +0300 schrieb Antti Seppälä: > Borgi2008 wrote: > > Hello, > > > > i've created a bugfixes. Hope it could helps you. > > > > Hendrik Borghorst > > > > > > Actually, looking at the code I cannot figure out why there has to be a > spinlock in the first place. > > The lock is only taken in the interrupt handler which already runs in > atomic context so there is no use in making the handler protected by a > spinlock. Am I missing something here? > > I think the spinlock is unnecessary and should be removed entirely. > > > -- > Antti Seppälä Hello, it could be that the spinlock can be completely removed. I only saw that the spinlock is called before initialization. :-) So I fixed because this crashed my system. I would like to see that the bug is fixed official so i have not to patch my kernels anymore. Best greets Hendrik Borghorst _______________________________________________ linux-dvb mailing list linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
