[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5d3750f3.1c69fb81.923dc.874d@mx.google.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 11:24:50 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To: Lina Iyer <ilina@...eaurora.org>, agross@...nel.org,
bjorn.andersson@...aro.org
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-soc@...r.kernel.org,
rnayak@...eaurora.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, dianders@...omium.org,
mkshah@...eaurora.org, "Raju P.L.S.S.S.N" <rplsssn@...eaurora.org>,
Lina Iyer <ilina@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 3/4] drivers: qcom: rpmh: switch over from spinlock irq variants
Quoting Lina Iyer (2019-07-22 14:53:39)
> From: "Raju P.L.S.S.S.N" <rplsssn@...eaurora.org>
>
> Switch over from using _irqsave/_irqrestore variants since we no longer
> race with a lock from the interrupt handler. While we are at it, rename
> the cache_lock to just lock to allow use of the lock to synchronize
> controller access.
Is there a reason why it can't be a mutex now?
>
> Signed-off-by: Raju P.L.S.S.S.N <rplsssn@...eaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Lina Iyer <ilina@...eaurora.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists