[PATCH] um: fix confusion irq early reenabling

Fix confusion about call context - comments and code are inconsistent and
plain wrong, my fault.

Signed-off-by: Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso <blaisorblade@yahoo.it>
Acked-by: Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
This commit is contained in:
Paolo 'Blaisorblade' Giarrusso 2007-03-07 20:41:12 -08:00 committed by Linus Torvalds
parent b53378856f
commit ec0ac8ad33

View File

@ -370,10 +370,10 @@ static irqreturn_t line_write_interrupt(int irq, void *data)
struct tty_struct *tty = line->tty;
int err;
/* Interrupts are enabled here because we registered the interrupt with
/* Interrupts are disabled here because we registered the interrupt with
* IRQF_DISABLED (see line_setup_irq).*/
spin_lock_irq(&line->lock);
spin_lock(&line->lock);
err = flush_buffer(line);
if (err == 0) {
return IRQ_NONE;
@ -381,7 +381,7 @@ static irqreturn_t line_write_interrupt(int irq, void *data)
line->head = line->buffer;
line->tail = line->buffer;
}
spin_unlock_irq(&line->lock);
spin_unlock(&line->lock);
if(tty == NULL)
return IRQ_NONE;