> > > > From: Thomas Gleixner [mailto:t...@linutronix.de]
> > > >
> > > > I think I asked this before, but I might have missed the answer.
> > > >
> > > > Why is this a rw_sempahore? It's never taken with down_read and
> > looking
> > > > at the usage sites it's simply a mutex, right?
> > >
> > > I
..@linuxdriverproject.org; *S-Par-
> Maintainer; Kershner, David A
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 09/29] staging: unisys: visorinput: remove
> unnecessary locking
>
> On Thu, 9 Jun 2016, Sell, Timothy C wrote:
> > > From: Thomas Gleixner [mailto:t...@linutronix.de]
> > >
>
On Thu, 9 Jun 2016, Sell, Timothy C wrote:
> > From: Thomas Gleixner [mailto:t...@linutronix.de]
> >
> > I think I asked this before, but I might have missed the answer.
> >
> > Why is this a rw_sempahore? It's never taken with down_read and looking
> > at the usage sites it's simply a mutex, righ
@vger.kernel.org; driverdev-
> de...@linuxdriverproject.org; *S-Par-Maintainer
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 09/29] staging: unisys: visorinput: remove
> unnecessary locking
>
> On Wed, 8 Jun 2016, David Kershner wrote:
> > + /*
> > +* If we're not paused, really enable inter
On Wed, 8 Jun 2016, David Kershner wrote:
> + /*
> + * If we're not paused, really enable interrupts.
> + * Regardless of whether we are paused, set a flag indicating
> + * interrupts should be enabled so when we resume, interrupts
> + * will really be enabled.
> + */
>
