[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160129.203810.1601035648854177084.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 20:38:10 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com, jason@...edaemon.net,
andrew@...n.ch, sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, alior@...vell.com,
nadavh@...vell.com, mw@...ihalf.com, linux@....linux.org.uk,
w@....eu
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 5/6] net: mvneta: The mvneta_percpu_elect function
should be atomic
From: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 17:26:06 +0100
> @@ -370,6 +370,8 @@ struct mvneta_port {
> struct net_device *dev;
> struct notifier_block cpu_notifier;
> int rxq_def;
> + /* protect */
> + spinlock_t lock;
>
> /* Core clock */
> struct clk *clk;
Protect what? This comment needs a lot of improvement.
Everyone knows a spinlock "protects" things, so if you aren't going
to actually describe what this lock protects, and in what contexts
the lock is used, you might as well not say anything at all.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists