On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 11:26 AM, Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> +static void pl011_enable_interrupts(struct uart_amba_port *uap)
> +{
> + spin_lock_irq(&uap->port.lock);
> +
> + /* Clear out any spuriously appearing RX interrupts */
> + writew(UART011_RTIS | UART011_RXIS,
> + uap->port.membase + UART011_ICR);
> + uap->im = UART011_RTIM;
> + if (!pl011_dma_rx_running(uap))
> + uap->im |= UART011_RXIM;
> + writew(uap->im, uap->port.membase + UART011_IMSC);
> + spin_unlock_irq(&uap->port.lock);
> +}
Shouldn't this function be using spin_lock_irqsave() and
spin_unlock_irqrestore()? If interrupts are generally disabled before
calling this function, then they will be enabled by the
spin_unlock_irq() call, and I don't think we want that. This function
is only supposed to enable pl011 interrupts, not all interrupts.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
