From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Ball Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci: fix possible scheduling while atomic Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2014 03:40:48 +0000 Message-ID: <86bnza6jpb.fsf@void.printf.net> References: <1389988630-9481-1-git-send-email-abrestic@chromium.org> <0D8B1718-0A9D-467A-AFC5-108A868DE3BB@nvidia.com> <86ha926utc.fsf@void.printf.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from void.printf.net ([89.145.121.20]:53419 "EHLO void.printf.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752026AbaARDkw (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jan 2014 22:40:52 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Andrew Bresticker's message of "Fri, 17 Jan 2014 19:21:09 -0800") Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Bresticker Cc: John Tobias , Philip Rakity , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Dong Aisheng Hi, On Sat, Jan 18 2014, Andrew Bresticker wrote: >>>> There's an existing patch for that... >>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg296596.html >>> >>> Ah, I see. Looks like it has yet to be picked up... >> >> The patches aren't quite identical -- Andrew's leaves the >> disable_irq() call in and Aisheng's removes it. Which should I take? > > Since the disable_irq() is now redundant, I suppose Aisheng's is more correct Thanks, pushed Aisheng's version to mmc-next for 3.14. - Chris. -- Chris Ball