Pierre Ossman wrote:
Nick Piggin wrote:
@@ -501,9 +501,9 @@ void mmc_detect_change(struct mmc_host *host,
unsigned long delay)
{
#ifdef CONFIG_MMC_DEBUG
unsigned long flags;
- spin_lock_irqsave(host->lock, flags);
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&host->lock, flags);
BUG_ON(host->removed);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(host->lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&host->lock, flags);
#endif
Do you actually need the lock there at all? What is it protecting?
It makes sure we don't have any race when it comes to modifying
host->removed.
If you want to ensure you always only modify host->removed from under
the spinlock, it would be enforcable by introducing an accessor function
and doing a BUG_ON(!spin_is_locked()) in there.
If you just want to ensure that host->removed is 0 at this point, you
shouldn't need any spinlocks AFAIKS... that way you can probably afford
to move it out from CONFIG_MMC_DEBUG and get wider testing.
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
