Hi, On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 05:55:19PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote: > On 11/21/2012 03:57 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 04:34:11PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote: > >> We don't really need a spinlock here, so get rid of it. > > > > can you prove it ? what if an IRQ happens right after disabling clocks > > on ->runtime_suspend() but before it returns ? Will this not cause a > > problem for you ? > > > > Which IRQ are you referring to? I don't see any IRQ handler in > omap-usb-hot.c oops, silly old me ;-) > In the original code, the spinlock is used only in > runtime_suspend/resume and probe functions and it didn't make any sense > to me why it was there in the first place. fair enough, I should've looked at the code before assuming there was an IRQ handler. Carry on :-) -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
