Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 Jun 2012 15:21:04 -0700 | From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH] pch_uart: Add eg20t_port lock field, avoid recursive spinlocks |
| |
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 02:41:46PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > > > On 06/05/2012 04:48 PM, Tomoya MORINAGA wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:07 AM, Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com> wrote: > >> Are there still concerns about the additional lock? I'll resend V2 > >> tomorrow with the single whitespace fix if I don't hear anything back today. > > > > I understand your saying. Looks good. > > However, I am not expert of linux-uart core system. > > So, I'd like UART maintainer to give us your opinion. > > Greg, Alan, > > any concerns with the locking approach I've adopted in the patch?
Care to resend the patch, as it was a RFC one, it's no longer in my queue.
thanks,
greg k-h
| |