From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756041Ab1HDDFQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2011 23:05:16 -0400 Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:33812 "EHLO cavan.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753028Ab1HDDFL (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2011 23:05:11 -0400 Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 04:04:41 +0100 From: Matthew Garrett To: Jan Beulich Cc: matt@console-pimps.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, fenghua.yu@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com, hpa@linux.intel.com, matt.fleming@linux.intel.com, a.zummo@towertech.it Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, efi: Don't recursively acquire rtc_lock Message-ID: <20110804030441.GA25314@srcf.ucam.org> References: <4E3A17BD0200007800073FC5@nat28.tlf.novell.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E3A17BD0200007800073FC5@nat28.tlf.novell.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: mjg59@cavan.codon.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on cavan.codon.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Well, the rtc_lock is an implementation detail of x86, while we're aiming to make the EFI code as general as possible. So I can see the argument for moving it to the callers. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org