Re: [patch] ns83820: spin_lock_irq() => spin_lock()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



From: Dan Carpenter <error27@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 21:18:53 +0200

> This is essentially cosmetic.  At this point the IRQs are already
> disabled because we called spin_lock_irq(&dev->rx_info.lock).
> 
> The real bug here was fixed back in 2006 in 3a10ccebe: "[PATCH] lock
> validator: fix ns83820.c irq-flags bug".  Prior to that patch, it was
> a "spin_lock_irq is not nestable" type bug.  The 2006 patch changes the
> unlock to not re-enable IRQs, which eliminates the potential deadlock.
> 
> But this bit was missed.  We should change the lock function as well so
> it balances nicely.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@xxxxxxxxx>

Applied.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux