From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfram Sang Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 06:45:20 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Revert "i2c: rcar: remove spinlock" Message-Id: <20140824064520.GA2578@katana> MIME-Version: 1 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI" List-Id: References: <1642788.pEhrsPDp4u@wasted.cogentembedded.com> In-Reply-To: <1642788.pEhrsPDp4u@wasted.cogentembedded.com> To: Sergei Shtylyov Cc: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org --+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 12:44:09AM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote: > This reverts commit 150b8be3cda54412ad7b54f5392b513b25c0aaa7. >=20 > The I2C core's per-adapter locks can't protect from IRQs, so the driver s= till > needs a spinlock to protect the register accesses. Looks to me like a plain revert. What about the issues you mentioned? Don't you want to fix them? Confused... --+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJT+YoAAAoJEBQN5MwUoCm2I9AP/3U4vvRRB1klX4xQSQtVQ1F6 CtNGnhiG99cNCsSw6I5VaONAyGKxMka0mpF9F/GaG5Wtzc0uKA9AWyd1qmv7j+rh i703jBrfSG3AmRI28BYgm9ITBVe0eR2Oc13XACmCSa+N5E/AQ/VAmi7DuwMThm/3 RZbMyaX8MFtEbjf3Bb6L4BDWgF9CU+TNg4ShIShPk4qVWGtyT6aH9HPiW+79omCD e01E53TYJP8kAxXESCWrYNlf0W6JJtmIncDfE2DOdyEsCX/hg2pYJNIBtX9eo8BC fVnjvev9cIMZKbBOsid2MMapAw78KLvrRd/2L9GRCVim596zjSb+DINoGBfPiQdP GQsIwidwSSPJCA+q/XJAFmJulhmIT1/bVsy4BC2f01TNc3ew6FOAJBRvttU4mOGq iEitR5CVkusm6npNjIfy9AGlLalDfSnwhZeg3MCinA4Q0eN9JWiTErqKnlufWRL8 HGaUl9P/+JfZ8VhbNuKsruPT3soyNh/DFBn1YmmWqOk7KLUAn9UOTHxTHtgKXhXL mrK+8NkS0i+YWjSETQGDs/jNZWynPWbuf/iFrVlyVTpwj+rQZJndB0VZcGZ7XMu6 tUPxSVyp+Sk2NSAajho2T3ik/LNW0DuUG7s+dfqLTR8PjQ3Jh2NXqs+x0wVeZnTB PvRSlaZG0B3/GL1FPKV/ =fjpP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --+HP7ph2BbKc20aGI--