From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: Initialize spinlocks in 8250 and don't clobber them. Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:38:33 +0100 Message-ID: <20081021103833.5e960c8d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> References: <48F51114.2010105@caviumnetworks.com> <20081020141750.d0610586.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from earthlight.etchedpixels.co.uk ([81.2.110.250]:36831 "EHLO lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751476AbYJUJjG (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 05:39:06 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20081020141750.d0610586.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: David Daney , linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, Tomaso.Paoletti@caviumnetworks.com > 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