Re: [PATCH] Fix for rtc.c non-atomic mess (try 2)

From: Cesar Eduardo Barros (cesarb@web4u.com.br)
Date: Sat Apr 22 2000 - 20:28:50 EST

Next message: Alexander Viro: "Re: fix: umount: device is busy"
Previous message: Alexander Viro: "Re: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()"
In reply to: Cesar Eduardo Barros: "[PATCH] Fix for rtc.c non-atomic mess (try 2)"
Next in thread: Cesar Eduardo Barros: "[PATCH] Fix for rtc.c non-atomic mess (try 3)"
Reply: Cesar Eduardo Barros: "[PATCH] Fix for rtc.c non-atomic mess (try 3)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Damn, just now I see a msg from Spraul in another thread...

"You could use spin_lock_irq instead of spin_lock_irqsave"... This means I'm
gonna have to redo it all AGAIN? <snif>

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Alexander Viro: "Re: fix: umount: device is busy"
Previous message: Alexander Viro: "Re: [PATCH] f_op->poll() without lock_kernel()"
In reply to: Cesar Eduardo Barros: "[PATCH] Fix for rtc.c non-atomic mess (try 2)"
Next in thread: Cesar Eduardo Barros: "[PATCH] Fix for rtc.c non-atomic mess (try 3)"
Reply: Cesar Eduardo Barros: "[PATCH] Fix for rtc.c non-atomic mess (try 3)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 23 2000 - 21:00:21 EST