Re: [PATCH] mtd: dc21285.c: handle nw_gpio_lock correctly

[Artem Bityutskiy]

On Fri, 2012-05-25 at 10:28 +0200, Christian Dietrich wrote:
> nw_gpio_lock is a raw_spinlock_t, therefore raw_spin_lock_irqsave should be
> used. it doesn't make a difference, while rlock is the first element of
> spinlock_t.
> 
> Also the check for machine_is_netwinder() is a double check of
> CONFIG_ARCH_NETWINDER.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Christian Dietrich <christian.dietrich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

I do not understand this commit message. Please, split your patch on 2
patches and put a better to each one. Thanks!

> ---
>  drivers/mtd/maps/dc21285.c |   13 +++++--------
>  1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/maps/dc21285.c b/drivers/mtd/maps/dc21285.c
> index 080f060..38fbf23 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/maps/dc21285.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/maps/dc21285.c
> @@ -38,9 +38,9 @@ static void nw_en_write(void)
>  	 * we want to write a bit pattern XXX1 to Xilinx to enable
>  	 * the write gate, which will be open for about the next 2ms.
>  	 */
> -	spin_lock_irqsave(&nw_gpio_lock, flags);
> +	raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&nw_gpio_lock, flags);

Please, make this to be a separate patch.

And surely there are many other places in the kernel which need this
conversion?

>  static void dc21285_write8(struct map_info *map, const map_word d, unsigned long adr)
>  {
> -	if (machine_is_netwinder())
> -		nw_en_write();
> +	nw_en_write();
>  	*CSR_ROMWRITEREG = adr & 3;

I do not understand why this "if" statement is not needed? Why it was
there in the first place and why you remove it? Please, describe this in
the commit message.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part