Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class

From	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class
Date	2015-12-01 15:10 +0100
Message-ID	<qATN0-2eD-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<qzv0m-5QM-5@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 6:20 PM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:

> The single pinmux controller can be cascaded to the other interrupt
> controllers. Hence when propagating wake-up settings to its parent
> interrupt controller, there's possiblity of detecting possible recursive
> locking and getting lockdep warning.
>
> This patch avoids this false positive by using a separate lockdep class
> for this single pinctrl interrupts.
>
> Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
> Cc: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org
> Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>

I need Tony's ACK on this patch before applying.

Is it a regression that needs to go into fixes?

Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> - 2015-12-01 15:10 +0100
  Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> - 2015-12-01 15:10 +0100
    Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-12-03 19:10 +0100
      Re: [PATCH 1/2] pinctrl: single: Use a separate lockdep class Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> - 2015-12-03 22:50 +0100

csiph-web