Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Jan 2020 07:48:15 -0800 | From | Guenter Roeck <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/9] watchdog: of_xilinx_wdt: Add comment to spinlock |
| |
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 06:56:49PM +0530, Srinivas Neeli wrote: > From: Srinivas Goud <srinivas.goud@xilinx.com> > > Based on checkpatch every spinlock should be documented. > The patch is fixing this issue: > ./scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict -f drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c > CHECK: spinlock_t definition without comment > + spinlock_t spinlock;
One of the most useless feedback messages from checkpatch.
> > Signed-off-by: Srinivas Goud <srinivas.goud@xilinx.com> > Signed-off-by: Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com> > --- > drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c > index 7fe4f7c3f7ce..00549164b3d7 100644 > --- a/drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c > +++ b/drivers/watchdog/of_xilinx_wdt.c > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ > struct xwdt_device { > void __iomem *base; > u32 wdt_interval; > - spinlock_t spinlock; > + spinlock_t spinlock; /* spinlock for register handling */
I don't see the added value here. Besides, what does the lock actually do ? Watchdog drivers are single-open, so it seems quite difficult for any of the protected functions to be called multiple times. The spinlock doesn't disable interrupts, so register accesses by other drivers are still possible. What am I missing ?
Guenter
> struct watchdog_device xilinx_wdt_wdd; > struct clk *clk; > }; > -- > 2.7.4 >
| |