Hello Sergei, 2015-02-16 1:02 GMT+09:00 Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Hello. > > On 02/15/2015 05:46 PM, Yoshihiro Kaneko wrote: > >> From: Kouichi Tomita <kouichi.tomita.yn@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > >> A command end interrupt should not be processed between command issue >> and setting of wait_for flag. It expects already the flag to be set. >> Therefore the exclusive control was added. > > >> Signed-off-by: Kouichi Tomita <kouichi.tomita.yn@xxxxxxxxxxx> >> Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Kaneko <ykaneko0929@xxxxxxxxx> >> --- > > >> This patch is based on next branch of Chris Ball's mmc tree. > > >> drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c | 11 ++++++++++- >> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c >> index 7d9d6a3..e5d0b42 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c > > [...] >> >> @@ -1171,6 +1174,12 @@ static irqreturn_t sh_mmcif_irqt(int irq, void >> *dev_id) >> struct sh_mmcif_host *host = dev_id; >> struct mmc_request *mrq; >> bool wait = false; >> + unsigned long flags; >> + int wait_work; >> + >> + spin_lock_irqsave(&host->lock, flags); >> + wait_work = host->wait_for; >> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&host->lock, flags); > > > Locking don't seem to have much sense here, as the read is already > atomic. Thank you for your review. I agree with you and I will remove this locking. Thanks, Kaneko > > WBR, Sergei > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
