From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tony Lindgren Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:46:46 -0800 Message-ID: <20151203214646.GD23396@atomide.com> References: <1448644860-29323-1-git-send-email-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <565DAA09.3030201@arm.com> <20151203180721.GU23396@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from muru.com ([72.249.23.125]:50651 "EHLO muru.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750736AbbLCVqv (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Dec 2015 16:46:51 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20151203180721.GU23396@atomide.com> Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org To: Sudeep Holla Cc: Linus Walleij , Grygorii Strashko , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" * Tony Lindgren [151203 10:07]: > * Sudeep Holla [151201 06:10]: > > > > > > On 01/12/15 14:06, Linus Walleij wrote: > > >On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Sudeep Holla 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 > > >>Cc: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org > > >>Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner > > >>Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla > > > > > >I need Tony's ACK on this patch before applying. > > > > > >Is it a regression that needs to go into fixes? > > > > > > > Not really, only needed by PATCH 2/2 to avoid recursive locking. > > No problem with this patch, so: > > Acked-by: Tony Lindgren Actually this needs to be merged together with 1/2 once the pending issues are fixed as this will add a lockdep warning with 1/2. So for now: Un-Acked-by: Tony Lindgren