From: Timur Tabi Subject: Re: [linuxppc-release] [PATCH v2 4/4] fsl-dma: use spin_lock_bh to instead of spin_lock_irqsave Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:23:47 -0500 Message-ID: <4FFF1633.1080308@freescale.com> References: <1341997326-18495-1-git-send-email-qiang.liu@freescale.com> <4FFD952D.8040201@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org" , "linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" , Vinod Koul , "herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au" , Dan Williams , Li Yang-R58472 , "davem@davemloft.net" To: Liu Qiang-B32616 Return-path: Received: from db3ehsobe005.messaging.microsoft.com ([213.199.154.143]:33324 "EHLO db3outboundpool.messaging.microsoft.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751112Ab2GLSXy (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Jul 2012 14:23:54 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Liu Qiang-B32616 wrote: > I compared my test result before and after this patch, write performance can > improved by 15%. I will send the latest patches sooner because of Ira's concern. > I will give a complete description about the improvement of spin_lock_bh(). > > About your question, spin_lock_bh is used in the case of bottom/half as its > name, there is no need to protect a running/pending list with spin_lock_irqsave. Please respin the patch and include this information in the patch description. -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale