* Sudeep Holla <[email protected]> [151201 06:10]: > > > On 01/12/15 14:06, Linus Walleij wrote: > >On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Sudeep Holla <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>The single pinmux controller can be cascaded to the other interrupt > >>controllers. Hence when propagating wake-up settings to its parent > >>interrupt controller, there's possiblity of detecting possible recursive > >>locking and getting lockdep warning. > >> > >>This patch avoids this false positive by using a separate lockdep class > >>for this single pinctrl interrupts. > >> > >>Cc: Linus Walleij <[email protected]> > >>Cc: [email protected] > >>Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> > >>Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <[email protected]> > > > >I need Tony's ACK on this patch before applying. > > > >Is it a regression that needs to go into fixes? > > > > Not really, only needed by PATCH 2/2 to avoid recursive locking.
No problem with this patch, so: Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <[email protected]> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
