On Sat, Jul 30, 2011 at 09:24:26AM -0700, Williams, Dan J wrote: > 2011/7/29 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > It's used in irq handling, so needs to be hardirq safe. > > > > This changelog does not make sense, spin_lock_irqsave *is* hardirq > safe. Is this trying to workaround a lockdep report? It's only hardirq save on !PREEMPT_RT. Without PREEMPT_RT there is no real difference between raw spinlocks and the normal ones. So maybe: It's used in irq handling, so needs to be hardirq safe even on PREEMPT_RT. ? Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rt-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
