[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <560A30DF.9050900@linux.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 09:34:07 +0300
From: Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>
To: Timur Tabi <timur@...i.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Anatolij Gustschin <agust@...x.de>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] powerpc/512x: add LocalPlus Bus FIFO device driver
On 28.09.2015 16:18, Timur Tabi wrote:
> Alexander Popov wrote:
>> The only question I have: why calling dma_unmap_single() from within
>> a spinlock is a bad practice?
>
> I don't know, but usually functions that allocate or free memory cannot be
> called from within a spinlock. You need to check that. Since the MPC5121
> is a single-core CPU, you might not notice if you're doing something wrong.
I've double-checked the code and LDD and don't see any reason to avoid
calling dma_unmap_single() from interrupt context and within spinlock.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Alexander
--
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