linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] serial: Initialize spinlocks in 8250 and don't clobber them.

To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: Initialize spinlocks in 8250 and don't clobber them.
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:38:33 +0100
Cc: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Tomaso.Paoletti@caviumnetworks.com
In-reply-to: <20081020141750.d0610586.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Organization: Red Hat UK Cyf., Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SL4 1TE, Y Deyrnas Gyfunol. Cofrestrwyd yng Nghymru a Lloegr o'r rhif cofrestru 3798903
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <48F51114.2010105@caviumnetworks.com> <20081020141750.d0610586.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
> But yes, copying a spinlock by value is quite wrong.  Perhaps we could
> retain the struct assigment and then run spin_lock_init() to get the
> spinlock into a sane state?

Kind of irrelevant now however, the split of patches that caused the
original bug is over and the NR_IRQ removal patch half of it hit Linus
tree.

Alan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>