Re: [PATCH for 4.12] Revert "pinctrl: rockchip: avoid hardirq-unsafe functions in irq_chip"

From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Cc: "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	"Heiko Stuebner" <heiko@sntech.de>,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
	"Julia Cartwright" <julia@ni.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, "John Keeping" <john@metanate.com>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "Doug Anderson" <dianders@chromium.org>,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	"Tony Lindgren" <tony@atomide.com>,
	"David.Wu" <david.wu@rock-chips.com>,
	'黄涛' <huangtao@rock-chips.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for 4.12] Revert "pinctrl: rockchip: avoid hardirq-unsafe functions in irq_chip"
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2017 20:07:25 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1706272006140.1890@nanos> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170627172306.GA91202@google.com>

On Tue, 27 Jun 2017, Brian Norris wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 03:06:26PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > That said, the commit should be reverted and the issue needs to analyzed
> > proper. We still need the RCU -> SCRU conversion, but that's a different
> > problem.
> 
> Can we consider this an "ack" for the $subject then? Heiko also gave his
> approval. How can this get merged? It's running a bit late for 4.12,
> though it really shouldn't be risky (at least for non-RT stuff that was
> working warning-free already in 4.11), but a 4.13-rc1 with -stable tag
> could work as well.

Yes. That revert can go into 4.12 from my POV, but I leave that to Linus.

Thanks,

	tglx