On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 06:56:49PM +0530, Srinivas Neeli wrote:
> From: Srinivas Goud <srinivas.goud@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Based on checkpatch every spinlock should be documented.
> The patch is fixing this issue:
> ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict -f drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c
> CHECK: spinlock_t definition without comment
> + spinlock_t spinlock;
One of the most useless feedback messages from checkpatch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Goud <srinivas.goud@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c
> index 7fe4f7c3f7ce..00549164b3d7 100644
> --- a/drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c
> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c
> @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@
> struct xwdt_device {
> void __iomem *base;
> u32 wdt_interval;
> - spinlock_t spinlock;
> + spinlock_t spinlock; /* spinlock for register handling */
I don't see the added value here. Besides, what does the lock actually do ?
Watchdog drivers are single-open, so it seems quite difficult for any
of the protected functions to be called multiple times. The spinlock doesn't
disable interrupts, so register accesses by other drivers are still possible.
What am I missing ?
Guenter
> struct watchdog_device xilinx_wdt_wdd;
> struct clk *clk;
> };
> --
> 2.7.4
>
