On Mon, Feb 8, 2021 at 11:11 AM luojiaxing <luojiaxing@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Sorry, my operation error causes a patch missing from this patch set. I > re-send the patch set. Please check the new one. What is the new one?! You have to give proper versioning and change log for your series. > On 2021/2/8 16:56, Luo Jiaxing wrote: > > There is no need to use API with _irqsave in hard IRQ handler, So replace > > those with spin_lock. How do you know that another CPU in the system can't serve the following interrupt from the hardware at the same time? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
Re: [Linuxarm] [PATCH for next v1 0/2] gpio: few clean up patches to replace spin_lock_irqsave with spin_lock
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [Linuxarm] [PATCH for next v1 0/2] gpio: few clean up patches to replace spin_lock_irqsave with spin_lock
- From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2021 15:28:44 +0200
- In-reply-to: <2b8001bb-0bcd-3fea-e15c-2722e7243209@huawei.com>
- References: <1612774577-55943-1-git-send-email-luojiaxing@huawei.com> <2b8001bb-0bcd-3fea-e15c-2722e7243209@huawei.com>
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH v5 2/7] gpio: ep93xx: Fix single irqchip with multi gpiochips
- Next by Date: [PATCH] gpio: GPIO_MXS should not default to y, unconditionally
- Previous by thread: Re: [Linuxarm] [PATCH for next v1 0/2] gpio: few clean up patches to replace spin_lock_irqsave with spin_lock
- Next by thread: Re: [Linuxarm] [PATCH for next v1 0/2] gpio: few clean up patches to replace spin_lock_irqsave with spin_lock
- Index(es):
 |