Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2010 09:06:56 -0800
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>
Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>, Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@ti.com>,
        Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
        Hari Kanigeri <h-kanigeri2@ti.com>, Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Introduce hardware spinlock framework
Message-ID: <20101214170656.GA3832@kroah.com>
References: <1291420247-18171-1-git-send-email-ohad@wizery.com>
 <AANLkTin1fd=Kei7Fo6G+uR+270HdTkc71fvsA6qjBjcA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin1fd=Kei7Fo6G+uR+270HdTkc71fvsA6qjBjcA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2243
Lines: 49

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 04:31:36PM +0200, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> Hi Greg, Tony,
> 
> On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 1:50 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com> wrote:
> > OMAP4 introduces a Hardware Spinlock device, which provides hardware
> > assistance for synchronization and mutual exclusion between heterogeneous
> > processors and those not operating under a single, shared operating system
> > (e.g. OMAP4 has dual Cortex-A9, dual Cortex-M3 and a C64x+ DSP).
> >
> > The intention of this hardware device is to allow remote processors,
> > that have no alternative mechanism to accomplish synchronization and mutual
> > exclusion operations, to share resources (such as memory and/or any other
> > hardware resource).
> >
> > This patchset adds hwspinlock framework that makes it possible
> > for drivers to use those hwspinlock devices and stay platform-independent.
> 
> ...
> 
> > ?Documentation/hwspinlock.txt ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ?299 +++++++++++++++
> > ?arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?1 +
> > ?arch/arm/mach-omap2/hwspinlock.c ? ? ? ? ? | ? 63 ++++
> > ?arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c | ? 64 ++++
> > ?drivers/Kconfig ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?| ? ?2 +
> > ?drivers/Makefile ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?1 +
> > ?drivers/hwspinlock/Kconfig ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? 22 ++
> > ?drivers/hwspinlock/Makefile ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?| ? ?6 +
> > ?drivers/hwspinlock/hwspinlock.h ? ? ? ? ? ?| ? 61 +++
> > ?drivers/hwspinlock/hwspinlock_core.c ? ? ? | ?557 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > ?drivers/hwspinlock/omap_hwspinlock.c ? ? ? | ?231 ++++++++++++
> > ?include/linux/hwspinlock.h ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ?298 +++++++++++++++
> > ?12 files changed, 1605 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> Can you please have a look and say if this looks OK ?

Look at what, I don't see a patch here.

I've seen a lot of discussion about this, are all of the review comments
now addressed?  Like the most important one, why is this generic code if
it's only for one specific platform?

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/