Date: Sun, 5 Oct 2008 21:55:55 +0200
From: Haavard Skinnemoen <haavard.skinnemoen@atmel.com>
To: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Alex Raimondi <raimondi@miromico.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Change comment in include linux/clk.h
Message-ID: <20081005215555.484445d4@hskinnemo-gx745.norway.atmel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20081005194035.GA23047@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1223234438-28004-1-git-send-email-haavard.skinnemoen@atmel.com>
	<20081005194035.GA23047@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 712
Lines: 17

Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > I see several ARM implementation using mutexes for locking in these
> > functions. So I assume we never want to call them from interrupt
> > context, right?  
> 
> Correct.  I'm not sure why anyone would even consider doing so.

I can't think of any reason to do so either, but having the comment
there makes me feel safer about having calls that might sleep or
irq-unsafe spinlocks in the implementation.

Haavard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/