[lm-sensors] [PATCH] w83793 watchdog support.
khali at linux-fr.org
Sat Jan 23 19:10:43 CET 2010
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 17:22:45 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> On 01/21/2010 10:47 AM, Sven Anders wrote:
> > There is one small problem left:
> > If the watchdog_open() functions failes with EBUSY, we must not
> > increase the counter.
> Oh, good catch that bug is present in the fschmd.c code too. Note that the
> way you've fixed this with an unlock in the error path is sort of
> frowned up on. It is correct, but we usually try to keep locks and unlocks
> in balanced pairs, so that it is easy to check for missing unlocks. See the
> patch I've done to fix this same issue for fschmd (attached).
I'll go apply that patch right now.
> > Please notify me, if I need to make some more changes or if you sent the patch
> > upstream.
> Well, I don't have any path for sending patches directly upstream, Jean Delvare
> usually does that for hwmon tree patches. I can ack this though, telling Jean
> it has been reviewed by me and I don't see any more issues.
Yes, if the patch is acked by Hans, I'll pick it.
> And I think Jean might fall over the balanced lock unlock thingie, Jean ?
I don't care either way. As long as the code is correct, I'm fine.
More information about the lm-sensors