[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1603020936520.3656@cbobk.fhfr.pm>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 09:37:21 +0100 (CET)
From: Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>
To: Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@...il.com>
cc: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>,
Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@...hat.com>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usbhid: Fix lockdep unannotated irqs-off warning
On Wed, 2 Mar 2016, Sedat Dilek wrote:
>
> static bool start_flush_work(struct work_struct *work, struct wq_barrier *barr)
> {
> struct worker *worker = NULL;
> struct worker_pool *pool;
> struct pool_workqueue *pwq;
>
> might_sleep();
>
> local_irq_disable();
> pool = get_work_pool(work);
> if (!pool) {
> local_irq_enable();
> return false;
> }
>
> spin_lock(&pool->lock); <--- XXX: spin_lock_irq() ???
No, this is fine. IRQs are unconditionally disabled a few lines above.
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
Powered by blists - more mailing lists