On Sun, 18 Oct 2009, Michael Schmitz wrote:
> > The patch is not removing any locking. It only
> >
> > 1) removes the local_irq_disable() that has been commented out for many
> > years already anyway
> > 2) removes the saving and restoring of CPU flags around do_fd_request(),
> > which is rather clearly a nop than any kind of "locking"
> >
> > > > [1] http://lkml.org/lkml/2002/12/27/58
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Kosina <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > NAck for my part.
> >
> > Please elaborate a little bit more which of the two points above you base
> > your NACK on.
>
> The removal of local_irq_disable() (which should have been
> local_irq_enable())
> just raised a flag, and I didn't immediately see why the interrupt enable had
> been commented out.
Yes, it has been commented out in a very non-intuitive way.
> With a bit of further thought on the matter I am satisfied that this patch
> will
> not impact on driver function at all, and do not wish to sustain my objection.
>
> IOW: Ack, and my sincere apologies for wasting your time.
Thanks, I have added
Acked-by: Michael Schmitz <[email protected]>
to the patch changelog in my tree.
--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
