On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 03:48:53PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 03:01:42PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:04:16 -0500
> > > Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > no, no. you're missing the point he
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 15:48:53 -0400 (EDT)
Alan Stern wrote:
> It should say something more along the lines of:
>
> Top-half handlers for threaded interrupts are not supposed to
> acquire any locks. None are needed because the top half is
> guaranteed to be mutually exclusive
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 03:01:42PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:04:16 -0500
> > Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >
> >
> > > no, no. you're missing the point here. The problem is that when RT
> > > is applied, spinlocks get reimplemente
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 03:01:42PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:04:16 -0500
> Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
>
> > no, no. you're missing the point here. The problem is that when RT
> > is applied, spinlocks get reimplemented as RT-aware mutexes which
> > works pretty well as lon
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:04:16 -0500
Felipe Balbi wrote:
> no, no. you're missing the point here. The problem is that when RT
> is applied, spinlocks get reimplemented as RT-aware mutexes which
> works pretty well as long as you don't install your own top and bottom
> halves. If you do, RT patch c
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 09:46:30AM -0700, David Cohen wrote:
> On September 21, 2015 9:27:43 AM PDT, Alan Stern
> wrote:
> >On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:37:47AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >> >
>
On September 21, 2015 9:27:43 AM PDT, Alan Stern
wrote:
>On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:37:47AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
>> > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> >
>> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:50:10AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
>> > > > On Mon
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:37:47AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:50:10AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Sep
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:37:47AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:50:10AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:31:15AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > >
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:50:10AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:31:15AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Roger Quadros wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Using spin
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:50:10AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:31:15AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Roger Quadros wrote:
> > >
> > > > Using spin_lock() in hard irq handler is pointless
> > > > and cau
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:31:15AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >
> > > Using spin_lock() in hard irq handler is pointless
> > > and causes a BUG() in RT (real-time) configuration
> > > so get rid of it.
> >
>
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:31:15AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Roger Quadros wrote:
>
> > Using spin_lock() in hard irq handler is pointless
> > and causes a BUG() in RT (real-time) configuration
> > so get rid of it.
>
> Wait a minute. Who says spin_lock is pointless in an I
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015, Roger Quadros wrote:
> Using spin_lock() in hard irq handler is pointless
> and causes a BUG() in RT (real-time) configuration
> so get rid of it.
Wait a minute. Who says spin_lock is pointless in an IRQ handler?
And who says it causes a BUG in RT configurations?
And if tho
Using spin_lock() in hard irq handler is pointless
and causes a BUG() in RT (real-time) configuration
so get rid of it.
Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros
---
drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c | 4
1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/gadget.c
index 0c
15 matches
Mail list logo