Hi,
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 05:55:19PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
> On 11/21/2012 03:57 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 04:34:11PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >> We don't really need a spinlock here, so get rid of it.
> >
> > can you prove it ? what if an IRQ h
On 11/21/2012 03:57 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 04:34:11PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
>> We don't really need a spinlock here, so get rid of it.
>
> can you prove it ? what if an IRQ happens right after disabling clocks
> on ->runtime_suspend() but before it returns
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 04:34:11PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
> We don't really need a spinlock here, so get rid of it.
can you prove it ? what if an IRQ happens right after disabling clocks
on ->runtime_suspend() but before it returns ? Will this not cause a
problem for you ?
(note that I
