[linux-dvb] [BUG] flexcop lockdep

Michael Krufky mkrufky at linuxtv.org
Thu Apr 5 18:47:21 CEST 2007

Michael Krufky wrote:
> Patrick Boettcher wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 Apr 2007, Borgi2008 wrote:
>>> Am Mittwoch, den 04.04.2007, 23:29 +0300 schrieb Antti Seppälä:
>>>> Borgi2008 wrote:
>>>>> Hello,
>>>>> i've created a bugfixes. Hope it could helps you.
>>>>> Hendrik Borghorst
>>>> Actually, looking at the code I cannot figure out why there has to be a
>>>> spinlock in the first place.
>>>> The lock is only taken in the interrupt handler which already runs in
>>>> atomic context so there is no use in making the handler protected by a
>>>> spinlock. Am I missing something here?
>>>> I think the spinlock is unnecessary and should be removed entirely.
>> Even on SMP systems? ISRs are only atomic on one CPU.
> Redhat has a bugzilla ticket open about this issue.
> Patrick, please take a look at the patch in bugzilla:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234900

Actually, the bugzilla patch is also from Hendrik Borghorst ...

Sorry about that... Nothing in the bugzilla report that hasnt already been
said in this thread.

Michael Krufky

More information about the linux-dvb mailing list