From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] TTY: remove tty_locked Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 17:35:02 +0100 Message-ID: <20110719173502.26fb2d55@bob.linux.org.uk> References: <1310646915-3032-1-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz> <1310646915-3032-5-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:38556 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750877Ab1GSQd1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:33:27 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1310646915-3032-5-git-send-email-jslaby@suse.cz> Sender: linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org To: Jiri Slaby Cc: gregkh@suse.de, jirislaby@gmail.com, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:35:14 +0200 Jiri Slaby wrote: > We used it really only serial and ami_serial. The rest of the > callsites were BUG/WARN_ONs to check if BTM is held. Now that we > pruned tty_locked from both of the real users, we can get rid of > tty_lock along with __big_tty_mutex_owner. All looks sensible to me for this series (the uart wakeup one isn't new and its a different battle to fight)