lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
FromDmitry Torokhov <>
SubjectRe: [RFC/RFT 1/5] Input: implement proper locking in input core
DateTue, 24 Jul 2007 01:52:45 -0400
Hi Jeff, 

On Tuesday 24 July 2007 01:35, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 
> spin_lock_irq() should generally be avoided.
> 
> In cases like the first case -- input_repeat_key() -- you are making 
> incorrect assumptions about the state of interrupts.  The other cases 
> are probably ok, but in general spin_lock_irq() has a long history of 
> being very fragile and quite often wrong.
> 
> Use spin_lock_irqsave() to be safe.  Definitely in input_repeat_key(), 
> but I strongly recommend removing spin_lock_irq() from all your patches 
> here.
>

Thasnk you for looking at the patches. Actually I went back and forth
between spin_lock_irq and spin_lock_irqsave.. I will change back to
irqsave version, it is indeed safer.

-- 
Dmitry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-07-24 07:55    [from the cache]
©2003-2008