On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 20:07:04 +0100 Oliver Neukum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So I would say that usually better be safe than sorry and use _irqsave, > but not in a place _designed_ to be nothing but an irq handler and in > a small driver in a prolific category of devices which might well be copied > and lead people to conclude that it is safe to add a down() there. The whole problem is that we balance against our assesements of what is probable in the future. I think that if someone is dumb enough to add down() into interrupt paths cannot be deterred by spin_lock present a few lines above. You are relying on a subtle signal sent by spin_lock to your mind, but it's no use against people adding semaphores. Their minds are not attuned to receive these signals. Adding comments like David said sounds like a good idea, Alan Stern's modification to sparse sounds even better, although I have no idea if sparse has suitable infrastructure for it. -- Pete ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
