On 2023-05-25, Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Seems right, but shouldn't you also fix the call to stop_rx() that
>> the same commit cfab87c2c271 ("serial: core: Introduce callback for
>> start_rx and do stop_rx in suspend only if this callback
>> implementation is present.") added? That one is also missing the
>> lock, right?
>
> Ah, I see. You did that in a separate patch and I wasn't CCed. I guess
> I would have just put the two in one patch, but I don't feel that
> strongly.
Actually stop_rx() was introduced in a different commit. The commit you
reference just changed it a bit. My other patch uses a different Fixes
tag.
Also, I was concerned about packing too much new spin locking in a
single commit in the hopes it will help with any bisecting issues.
> Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks!
John
