On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 Andrew Morton wrote:It's not in our tree... This is what I can see in the MAINTAINERS file:
Alexey, please don't assume that everyone reads lkml.I Cc: the v4l people, maybe they can answer the question.
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 2005 01:16:47 +0400
From: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: zoran drivers: absense of locking?
I've tried to read random part of a tree and now scratching my head
with a question:
what protects the number and a list of registered codecs in
/* amount of chips attached via this driver */
static int zr36050_codecs = 0;
Decremented in zr36050_unset().
Checked for maximum value, used and incremented in zr36050_setup().
[Assigment to 0 in zr36050_init_module is not needed. dprintk() in
zr36050_cleanup_module() should be converted to BUG_ON, so I'll ignore
zr36050_unset() = struct videocodec::unset
zr36050_setup() = struct videocodec::setup
The only place where ->unset and ->setup methods are called is
Both videocodec functions are exported.
No spinlocks or semaphores in sight.
Does anybody know what protects the list of registered codecs in zoran
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/