Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Jul 2009 13:30:54 -0700 (PDT) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: matroxfb: fix regression with uninitalized fb_info->mm_lock mutex (second head) |
| |
On Tue, 7 Jul 2009, Krzysztof Helt wrote: > > Remove redundant locking by the mm_lock mutex before a second head of matrox > framebuffer is registered.
Why do you write misleading commentary like this.
> +/* > + * This function is called before the register_framebuffer so > + * no locking is needed. > + */
Or this?
It's not about "needed". The locking is not only not needed, it would be BUGGY.
And it's not "redundant". That implies that it's done somewhere else. It's more than "not needed" - it would be actively buggy to lock things there.
I really don't like how you're approaching this. You're ignoring the real issues I ask you, you're writing misleading comments and commit messages, and the end result is fragile code. I still don't understand why you insist on initializing those things late, which is the primary problem here.
Linus
| |