Re: [PATCH] atmel_serial: Split the interrupt handler

Hello Haavard,

> Hmm...perhaps we can eliminate the locking in the status handler
> too...? Does anyone see a problem with this patch?

I have not seen any problem so far, besides, I am very happy with a
lockless interrupt handling, because this helps reducing latencies.

Tested it on top of the other 5 patches, and everything still works,
also tested under stress conditions.

So:
Acked-by: Remy Bohmer <[email protected]>


Kind Regards,

Remy
--
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/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH] atmel_serial: Split the interrupt handler
  - From: Haavard Skinnemoen <[email protected]>

References:
- [PATCH] atmel_serial: Split the interrupt handler
  - From: Haavard Skinnemoen <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] atmel_serial: Split the interrupt handler
  - From: "Remy Bohmer" <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH] atmel_serial: Split the interrupt handler
  - From: Haavard Skinnemoen <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] atmel_serial: Split the interrupt handler
Next by Date: Re: [RFC/PATCH] 2.6.24-rcx: Make sys_poll() wait at least timeout ms
Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] atmel_serial: Split the interrupt handler
Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] atmel_serial: Split the interrupt handler
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[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]