On Tuesday 01 September 2009, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:21:11 -0700
> David Brownell <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > From: Tero Kristo <[email protected]>
> > 
> > Previous restore was lazy and only restored CHxCONF when it was needed by a
> > specific chip select. This could cause occasional errors on an SPI bus where
> > multiple chip selects are in use.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Tero Kristo <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Kevin Hilman <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: David Brownell <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  drivers/spi/omap2_mcspi.c |   16 ++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)
> > 
> > --- a/drivers/spi/omap2_mcspi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/spi/omap2_mcspi.c
> > @@ -134,6 +134,7 @@ struct omap2_mcspi_cs {
> >     void __iomem            *base;
> >     unsigned long           phys;
> >     int                     word_len;
> > +   struct list_head        node;
> >     /* Context save and restore shadow register */
> >     u32                     chconf0;
> >  };
> > @@ -145,6 +146,7 @@ struct omap2_mcspi_regs {
> >     u32 sysconfig;
> >     u32 modulctrl;
> >     u32 wakeupenable;
> > +   struct list_head cs;
> >  };
> 
> Which locking protects these new lists?

One's the head, one's the instance ... the list is used in
activation and deactivation paths, so the same locks which
already protect those paths.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with 
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
spi-devel-general mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spi-devel-general

Reply via email to