Re: [PATCH] ds1620: Push BKL down

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Alan Cox <alan@...>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Tuesday, July 8, 2008 - 4:08 pm

On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 09:35:29PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:

In principle, no issues with the patch, and I'd ack it.  However, I've
made some comments about whether the BKL is needed in all these places.
Whether your intention is just to push the BKL down or to actually
eliminate it will of course determine whether you want to delete those.


These two should stay since there's no other protection against reading half
the state in one thread while another writes the state (where state is
the high/low trip points for the fan speed.)


ds1620_in() is protected by a spinlock internally, and cvt_9_to_int
is just a conversion function, so not required.


ds1620_in() is protected by a spinlock internally, so not required.


Not required - netwinder_get_fan() essentially just reads a pair of
GPIO registers and reports the state of the GPIO.


Not needed - the internals of netwinder_set_fan() takes a spinlock.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] ds1620: Push BKL down, Alan Cox, (Thu May 22, 4:35 pm)
Re: [PATCH] ds1620: Push BKL down, Russell King, (Tue Jul 8, 4:08 pm)
Re: [PATCH] ds1620: Push BKL down, Alan Cox, (Tue Jul 8, 3:55 pm)