Locking in the clk API
skannan at codeaurora.org
Thu Jan 27 22:29:39 EST 2011
On 01/27/2011 01:07 PM, Alan Cox wrote:
>>> For internal tree purposes, does .set_termios need to be atomic? Can it
>>> grab mutexes instead of spinlock?
>> I think I already answered that question above where I said "protect
>> against the interrupt handler accessing the port->* stuff".
> I'm not sure you answered it correctly however as the locking nowdays is
> a bit different.
> Architecturally the termios handling doesn't need a spin lock nor is it
> called under one. In fact it's vital this is the case because of USB.
Thanks for the clarification Alan. This is what I was looking for.
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel