Re: [PATCH 2/2] mmc: dw_mmc: Protect read-modify-write of INTMASKwith a lock

[Doug Anderson]

Jaehoon / James

On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 2:51 AM, Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> In this case it'd only be a space and code complexity thing I think. I
>> suppose in some cases the benefit of finer-grained locking is probably
>> pretty marginal, but there's a good case for it here. It might be
>> worth renaming the lock to irq_lock or something like that so it's
>> clear it doesn't have to protect only for INTMASK in the future - up
>> to you.
> It seems good that use the irq_lock than intmask_lock. (It's just naming)

Done in v2.
--
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/