> >The i2c core has per-adapter locks, so no need to protect again. > > The core's lock is unable to protect from the IRQs. So I'm proposing to > revert this patch. It's a pity I hadn't noticed this issue when the patch > was posted.
Yes, you are right. I noticed a while ago, too, but then got side-tracked :( > I'm afraid this unlock is misplaced, the code continues to access the > registers. > > > ret = rcar_i2c_bus_barrier(priv); > > Should probably unlock here instead? I can check details next week earliest. If you are confident with your suggestions, feel free to send one patch with the revert and the updates you mentioned. Thanks, Wolfram
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
