[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YMuJzDxblPNkpFjH@phenom.ffwll.local>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 19:43:40 +0200
From: Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>
To: Yu Jiahua <yujiahua1@...wei.com>
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] apply: use DEFINE_SPINLOCK() instead of
spin_lock_init().
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 07:17:13PM -0800, Yu Jiahua wrote:
> From: Jiahua Yu <yujiahua1@...wei.com>
>
> spinlock can be initialized automatically with DEFINE_SPINLOCK()
> rather than explicitly calling spin_lock_init().
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiahua Yu <yujiahua1@...wei.com>
Stuffed into drm-misc-next. The subject looked a bit strange, so I fixed
that up.
-Daniel
> ---
> drivers/video/fbdev/omap2/omapfb/dss/apply.c | 4 +---
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/video/fbdev/omap2/omapfb/dss/apply.c b/drivers/video/fbdev/omap2/omapfb/dss/apply.c
> index c71021091828..acca991c7540 100644
> --- a/drivers/video/fbdev/omap2/omapfb/dss/apply.c
> +++ b/drivers/video/fbdev/omap2/omapfb/dss/apply.c
> @@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ static struct {
> } dss_data;
>
> /* protects dss_data */
> -static spinlock_t data_lock;
> +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(data_lock);
> /* lock for blocking functions */
> static DEFINE_MUTEX(apply_lock);
> static DECLARE_COMPLETION(extra_updated_completion);
> @@ -131,8 +131,6 @@ static void apply_init_priv(void)
> struct mgr_priv_data *mp;
> int i;
>
> - spin_lock_init(&data_lock);
> -
> for (i = 0; i < num_ovls; ++i) {
> struct ovl_priv_data *op;
>
> --
> 2.17.1
>
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch
Powered by blists - more mailing lists