Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Mar 2017 09:22:05 +0000 | From | Lee Jones <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 14/19] mfd: t7l66xb: make use of raw_spinlock variants |
| |
On Wed, 15 Mar 2017, Julia Cartwright wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:17:44AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Thu, 09 Mar 2017, Julia Cartwright wrote: > > > > > The t7l66xb mfd driver currently implements an irq_chip for handling > > > interrupts; due to how irq_chip handling is done, it's necessary for the > > > irq_chip methods to be invoked from hardirq context, even on a a > > > real-time kernel. Because the spinlock_t type becomes a "sleeping" > > > spinlock w/ RT kernels, it is not suitable to be used with irq_chips. > > > > > > A quick audit of the operations under the lock reveal that they do only > > > minimal, bounded work, and are therefore safe to do under a raw spinlock. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Julia Cartwright <julia@ni.com> > > > --- > > > drivers/mfd/t7l66xb.c | 20 ++++++++++---------- > > > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > > > Can the 3 MFD patches in this set be applied on their own, or is there > > a dependency somewhere else in the set? > > All of the patches are completely independent, so may be applied on > their own. > > > NB: It's normally a good idea to send the set to everyone, or at the > > very least, the 00/00th patch. > > Sorry I neglected to CC. I'll be posting a v2 with the patches that > haven't yet hit next (as of tomorrow, likely), with a revised version of > the coccinelle patch, and will CC you on the coverletter.
To save a clash of me applying and you submitting v2 I'll not apply the MFD patches just yet. But if I have caught you in time, please apply the following tag to them:
For my own reference: Acked-for-MFD-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
-- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
| |