> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx On Behalf Of Chikkature Rajashekar, Madhusudhan
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Felipe Balbi" <felipe.balbi@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 05:01:27PM +0530, ext Madhusudhan Chikkature wrote:
> >> From: Madhusudhan Chikkature<madhu.cr@xxxxxx>
> >>
> >> This patch replaces the usage of semaphore by mutex.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Madhusudhan Chikkature<madhu.cr@xxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/w1/masters/omap_hdq.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
> >> 1 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> Index: linux-omap-2.6/drivers/w1/masters/omap_hdq.c
> >> ===================================================================
> >> --- linux-omap-2.6.orig/drivers/w1/masters/omap_hdq.c 2008-09-24 11:13:12.000000000 +0530
> >> +++ linux-omap-2.6/drivers/w1/masters/omap_hdq.c 2008-09-24 11:49:45.000000000 +0530
> >> @@ -55,7 +55,7 @@ static int w1_id;
> >> struct hdq_data {
> >> struct device *dev;
> >> void __iomem *hdq_base;
> >> - struct semaphore hdq_semlock;
> >> + struct mutex hdq_mutex;
> >> int hdq_usecount;
> >> struct clk *hdq_ick;
> >> struct clk *hdq_fck;
> >
> > Please, fix these two:
> >
> > CHECK: struct mutex definition without comment
> > #58: FILE: w1/masters/omap_hdq.c:58:
> > + struct mutex hdq_mutex;
> >
> > CHECK: spinlock_t definition without comment
> > #63: FILE: w1/masters/omap_hdq.c:63:
> > + spinlock_t hdq_spinlock;
> >
> > total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 2 checks, 732 lines checked
>
> I dont see any such checks reported by checkpatch.pl?
>
Oh, I guess Felipe uses `checkpatch.pl --strict`, right Felipe?
- Anand
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
