> >The i2c core has per-adapter locks, so no need to protect again. > > The core's lock is unable to protect from the IRQs. So I'm proposing to > revert this patch. It's a pity I hadn't noticed this issue when the patch > was posted. Yes, you are right. I noticed a while ago, too, but then got side-tracked :( > I'm afraid this unlock is misplaced, the code continues to access the > registers. > > > ret = rcar_i2c_bus_barrier(priv); > > Should probably unlock here instead? I can check details next week earliest. If you are confident with your suggestions, feel free to send one patch with the revert and the updates you mentioned. Thanks, Wolfram
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
