On Tue, Nov 03, 2009 at 11:42:21AM +0900, jassi brar wrote: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2009 at 8:17 PM, Mark Brown > >> + local_irq_save(irqs); > > Why local_irq_save()? On existing uniprocessor systems they should be > Don't we need to protect critical mode change in PCM control register? > Since the s3c64xx_dsp_snd_tx/rxctrl is small and non-blocking, I think > protection by simply enabling/disabling IRQs should be fine. Yes, but you're only disabling IRQs on the local CPU. This means that a future multi-core CPU variant won't get the benefit of the lock. Since the locking primitives are implemented so that the SMP-specifics compile out there should be no performance overhead from being prepared for that. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |