On Tue, 21 Mar 2017 17:05:40 +0100
<lionel.debi...@st.com> wrote:
> From: Lionel Debieve <lionel.debi...@st.com>
>
> The lock is a sleeping lock and local_irq_save() is not the
> standard implementation now. Working for both -RT and non
> RT.
If this is for both RT and non RT then the patch subject should just be
[PATCH] and not [PATCH RT] as the latter tells upstream folks not to
bother.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lionel Debieve <lionel.debi...@st.com>
> ---
> drivers/tty/serial/st-asc.c | 8 +++-----
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/st-asc.c b/drivers/tty/serial/st-asc.c
> index 379e5bd..1815423 100644
> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/st-asc.c
> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/st-asc.c
> @@ -803,13 +803,12 @@ static void asc_console_write(struct console
> *co, const char *s, unsigned count) int locked = 1;
> u32 intenable;
>
> - local_irq_save(flags);
> if (port->sysrq)
> locked = 0; /* asc_interrupt has already claimed the
> lock */ else if (oops_in_progress)
> - locked = spin_trylock(&port->lock);
> + locked = spin_trylock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags);
> else
> - spin_lock(&port->lock);
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&port->lock, flags);
>
> /*
> * Disable interrupts so we don't get the IRQ line bouncing
I'm nervous about the above comment, which in full is:
/*
* Disable interrupts so we don't get the IRQ line bouncing
* up and down while interrupts are disabled.
*/
I'm not sure if disabling interrupts helps on an SMP system. This patch
does change what happens when port->sysrq is set. But I'm not sure we
care.
-- Steve
> @@ -827,8 +826,7 @@ static void asc_console_write(struct console *co,
> const char *s, unsigned count) asc_out(port, ASC_INTEN, intenable);
>
> if (locked)
> - spin_unlock(&port->lock);
> - local_irq_restore(flags);
> + spin_unlock_irqrestore(&port->lock, flags);
> }
>
> static int asc_console_setup(struct console *co, char *options)
