On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 19:49 -0700, David Miller wrote:

From: Ben Hutchings <redacted>
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2010 03:46:28 +0100

quoted

On Sat, 2010-07-10 at 20:18 +0900, Ken Kawasaki wrote:

quoted

axnet_cs:
    use spin_lock_irqsave instead of spin_lock in ax_interrupt

[...]

I assume this is because it's now called from ei_watchdog() and not only
from interrupt context.  Perhaps you should explain that in the commit
message.

No, interrupt handlers in general may not assume that interrupts
are off or on when they are invoked.

Therefore they must use irqflags saving/restoring.

But an interrupt handler will not be called recursively for the same
IRQ.  Since this device only uses one IRQ, surely it was OK to use
spin_lock() in this function so long as it was only called from the
interrupt handler.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.