There is no reason in this lock. At least for now.
Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
Based on master
drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
index 9919cb3..8d1d373 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
@@ -365,7 +365,6 @@ static inline void slave_write(struct cpsw_slave *slave, u32 val, u32 offset)
}
struct cpsw_priv {
- spinlock_t lock;
struct platform_device *pdev;
struct net_device *ndev;
struct napi_struct napi_rx;
@@ -2413,7 +2412,6 @@ static int cpsw_probe_dual_emac(struct platform_device *pdev,
}
priv_sl2 = netdev_priv(ndev);
- spin_lock_init(&priv_sl2->lock);
priv_sl2->data = *data;
priv_sl2->pdev = pdev;
priv_sl2->ndev = ndev;
@@ -2533,7 +2531,6 @@ static int cpsw_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
platform_set_drvdata(pdev, ndev);
priv = netdev_priv(ndev);
- spin_lock_init(&priv->lock);
priv->pdev = pdev;
priv->ndev = ndev;
priv->dev = &ndev->dev;
--
1.9.1
--
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
