[PATCH -mm] Replace cli()/sti() pair with spinlocks in cmd206 driver

[M.Baris Demiray]

Hi Andrew,
Following patch replaces the deprecated cli()/sti() pair with spinlocks and
fixes the following warning:

<snipped>
   gcc -m32 -Wp,-MD,drivers/cdrom/.cm206.o.d  -nostdinc -isystem /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i486-slackware-linux/3.3.4/include
-D__KERNEL__ -Iinclude  -Wall -Wundef -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -ffreestanding
-O2     -fno-omit-frame-pointer -fno-optimize-sibling-calls -g -pipe -msoft-float -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2
-march=i686  -mregparm=3 -Iinclude/asm-i386/mach-default     -DMODULE -DKBUILD_BASENAME=cm206 -DKBUILD_MODNAME=cm206 -c
-o drivers/cdrom/.tmp_cm206.o drivers/cdrom/cm206.c
drivers/cdrom/cm206.c: In function `send_command':
drivers/cdrom/cm206.c:473: warning: implicit declaration of function `cli'
drivers/cdrom/cm206.c: In function `receive_byte':
drivers/cdrom/cm206.c:494: warning: implicit declaration of function `sti'
</snipped>

o Replace the deprecated cli()/sti() pair with spinlocks and
   fix a warning in cmd206 cdrom driver

Signed-off-by: M.Baris Demiray <baris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

--- linux-2.6.13-rc6-mm1/drivers/cdrom/cm206.c.orig	2005-08-20 11:24:32.000000000 +0000
+++ linux-2.6.13-rc6-mm1/drivers/cdrom/cm206.c	2005-08-22 18:31:05.000000000 +0000
@@ -192,6 +192,7 @@
  #include <linux/mm.h>
  #include <linux/slab.h>
  #include <linux/init.h>
+#include <linux/spinlock.h>

  /* #include <linux/ucdrom.h> */

@@ -303,6 +304,7 @@
  static struct cm206_struct *cd;	/* the main memory structure */
  static struct request_queue *cm206_queue;
  static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(cm206_lock);
+static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(cm206_lock_port);

  /* First, we define some polling functions. These are actually
     only being used in the initialization. */
@@ -470,7 +472,8 @@
  	debug(("Sending 0x%x\n", command));
  	if (!(inw(r_line_status) & ls_transmitter_buffer_empty)) {
  		cd->command = command;
-		cli();		/* don't interrupt before sleep */
+		/* don't interrupt before sleep */
+		spin_lock_irq(&cm206_lock_port);
  		outw(dc_mask_sync_error | dc_no_stop_on_error |
  		     (inw(r_data_status) & 0x7f), r_data_control);
  		/* interrupt routine sends command */
@@ -487,11 +490,11 @@
  static uch receive_byte(int timeout)
  {
  	uch ret;
-	cli();
-	debug(("cli\n"));
+	spin_lock_irq(&cm206_lock_port);
+	debug(("cm206_lock_port locked\n"));
  	ret = cd->ur[cd->ur_r];
  	if (cd->ur_r != cd->ur_w) {
-		sti();
+		spin_unlock_irq(&cm206_lock_port);
  		debug(("returning #%d: 0x%x\n", cd->ur_r,
  		       cd->ur[cd->ur_r]));
  		cd->ur_r++;
@@ -1407,7 +1410,7 @@
  {
  	int irqs, irq;
  	outw(dc_normal | READ_AHEAD, r_data_control);	/* disable irq-generation */
-	sti();
+	spin_unlock_irq(&cm206_lock_port);
  	irqs = probe_irq_on();
  	reset_cm260();		/* causes interrupt */
  	udelay(100);		/* wait for it */
@@ -1447,14 +1450,14 @@
  	} else
  		printk(" IRQ %d found\n", cm206_irq);
  #else
-	cli();
+	spin_lock_irq(&cm206_lock_port);
  	reset_cm260();
  	/* Now, the problem here is that reset_cm260 can generate an
  	   interrupt. It seems that this can cause a kernel oops some time
  	   later. So we wait a while and `service' this interrupt. */
  	mdelay(1);
  	outw(dc_normal | READ_AHEAD, r_data_control);
-	sti();
+	spin_unlock_irq(&cm206_lock_port);
  	printk(" using IRQ %d\n", cm206_irq);
  #endif
  	if (send_receive_polled(c_drive_configuration) !=


--
"You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be
unplugged. And many of them are no inert, so hopelessly dependent
on the system, that they will fight to protect it."
                                                         Morpheus

begin:vcard
fn:M.Baris Demiray
n:Demiray;M.Baris
org:Labris Teknoloji
adr:;;Teknokent Silikon Bina No:24 ODTU;Ankara;;06531;Turkey
email;internet:baris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
title:Yazilim Gelistirme Uzmani
tel;work:+903122101490
tel;fax:+903122101492
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.labristeknoloji.com/~baris/
version:2.1
end:vcard