On 05/03/2021 17:29, Hector Martin wrote:

On 06/03/2021 01.20, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

quoted

quoted

I am just splitting an
existing function into two, where one takes the lock and the other does
the work. Do you mean using a different locking function? I'm not
entirely sure what you're suggesting.

Yes, as a prerequisite

spin_lock_irqsave -> spin_lock().

Krzysztof, is this something you want in this series? I was trying to 
avoid logic changes to the non-Apple paths.

I don't quite get the need for such change (the code will be still
called in interrupt handler, right?), but assuming the "why?" is
properly documented, it can be a separate patch here.

Best regards,
Krzysztof