From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Kosina Subject: Re: Fwd: [PATCH] [RFC] ataflop: remove buggy IRQ disable from do_fd_request() Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2009 09:35:30 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <10f740e80910100201n30367714uc57ec3c9c39b92af@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-m68k-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-m68k@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Schmitz Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-m68k , Tejun Heo , Jens Axboe , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 18 Oct 2009, Michael Schmitz wrote: > > The patch is not removing any locking. It only > > > > 1) removes the local_irq_disable() that has been commented out for many > > years already anyway > > 2) removes the saving and restoring of CPU flags around do_fd_request(), > > which is rather clearly a nop than any kind of "locking" > > > > > > [1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2002/12/27/58 > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina > > > > > > NAck for my part. > > > > Please elaborate a little bit more which of the two points above you base > > your NACK on. > > The removal of local_irq_disable() (which should have been local_irq_enable()) > just raised a flag, and I didn't immediately see why the interrupt enable had > been commented out. Yes, it has been commented out in a very non-intuitive way. > With a bit of further thought on the matter I am satisfied that this patch will > not impact on driver function at all, and do not wish to sustain my objection. > > IOW: Ack, and my sincere apologies for wasting your time. Thanks, I have added Acked-by: Michael Schmitz to the patch changelog in my tree. -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.