From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ch1outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com (ch1ehsobe005.messaging.microsoft.com [216.32.181.185]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "mail.global.frontbridge.com", Issuer "Microsoft Secure Server Authority" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F9DD2C00B7 for ; Tue, 17 Jul 2012 00:25:29 +1000 (EST) From: Tabi Timur-B04825 To: Liu Qiang-B32616 Subject: Re: [linuxppc-release] [PATCH v3 4/4] fsl-dma: use spin_lock_bh to instead of spin_lock_irqsave Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 14:25:18 +0000 Message-ID: <5004244D.4000106@freescale.com> References: <1342411780-29930-1-git-send-email-qiang.liu@freescale.com> In-Reply-To: <1342411780-29930-1-git-send-email-qiang.liu@freescale.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: Li Yang-R58472 , Vinod Koul , "herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au" , "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org" , Dan Williams , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , "davem@davemloft.net" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Qiang Liu wrote: > Use spin_lock_bh to instead of spin_lock_irqsave for improving performanc= e. You forgot to include the evidence that performance has improved, as well=20 as an explanation why it's okay to use spin_lock_bh, and why it's faster.=20 I told you to respin the patch with that information in the patch=20 description. --=20 Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale