Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 1 Dec 2015 15:06:13 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class | From | Linus Walleij <> |
| |
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
> The single pinmux controller can be cascaded to the other interrupt > controllers. Hence when propagating wake-up settings to its parent > interrupt controller, there's possiblity of detecting possible recursive > locking and getting lockdep warning. > > This patch avoids this false positive by using a separate lockdep class > for this single pinctrl interrupts. > > Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> > Cc: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org > Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
I need Tony's ACK on this patch before applying.
Is it a regression that needs to go into fixes?
Yours, Linus Walleij
| |