On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 11:27:13PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(irq_controller_lock);
Hmm, why is this lock needed? The uses below don't seem like they need
locking:
> +static void combiner_mask_irq(unsigned int irq)
> +{
> + u32 mask = 1 << (irq % 32);
> +
> + spin_lock(&irq_controller_lock);
> + __raw_writel(mask, combiner_base(irq) + COMBINER_ENABLE_CLEAR);
> + spin_unlock(&irq_controller_lock);
> +}
> +
> +static void combiner_unmask_irq(unsigned int irq)
> +{
> + u32 mask = 1 << (irq % 32);
> +
> + spin_lock(&irq_controller_lock);
> + __raw_writel(mask, combiner_base(irq) + COMBINER_ENABLE_SET);
> + spin_unlock(&irq_controller_lock);
> +}
> +
> +static void combiner_handle_cascade_irq(unsigned int irq, struct irq_desc *desc)
> +{
...
> + spin_lock(&irq_controller_lock);
> + status = __raw_readl(chip_data->base + COMBINER_INT_STATUS);
> + spin_unlock(&irq_controller_lock);
--
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
