[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170207124528.656894489@linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 13:58:42 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
stable@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tec-electronic.com>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: [PATCH 4.9 08/66] pinctrl: baytrail: Add missing spinlock usage in byt_gpio_irq_handler
4.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tec-electronic.com>
commit cdca06e4e85974d8a3503ab15709dbbaf90d3dd1 upstream.
According to VLI64 Intel Atom E3800 Specification Update (#329901)
concurrent read accesses may result in returning 0xffffffff and write
accesses may be dropped silently.
To workaround all accesses must be protected by locks.
Signed-off-by: Alexander Stein <alexander.stein@...tec-electronic.com>
Acked-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
drivers/pinctrl/intel/pinctrl-baytrail.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/intel/pinctrl-baytrail.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/intel/pinctrl-baytrail.c
@@ -1612,7 +1612,9 @@ static void byt_gpio_irq_handler(struct
continue;
}
+ raw_spin_lock(&vg->lock);
pending = readl(reg);
+ raw_spin_unlock(&vg->lock);
for_each_set_bit(pin, &pending, 32) {
virq = irq_find_mapping(vg->chip.irqdomain, base + pin);
generic_handle_irq(virq);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists