[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090718232000.GB7426@sgi.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2009 18:20:00 -0500
From: Robin Holt <holt@....com>
To: Julia Lawall <julia@...u.dk>
Cc: holt@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] drivers/misc/sgi-xp: convert nested
spin_lock_irqsave to spin_lock
On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 05:23:57PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> - spin_lock_irqsave(&part_uv->flags_lock, irq_flags);
> + spin_lock(&part_uv->flags_lock);
> part_uv->flags &= ~XPC_P_CACHED_ACTIVATE_GRU_MQ_DESC_UV;
Please do not change this.
I think this is a false positive to a automated script. We are not
comparing against the processors irq flags, but rather against the
partitions flags. Note above the difference between irq_flags and
part_uv->flags.
Maybe I misunderstand your point in this patch.
Robin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists