From 9be48a94b8ae8c944dc918ad65f2f27e9df3ed00 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Julia Lawall Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 22:50:56 +0200 Subject: It looks at least odd to apply spin_unlock to a mutex. The semantic patch that makes this change is as follows: (http://www.emn.fr/x-info/coccinelle/) // @def@ declarer DEFINE_MUTEX; identifier m; @@ DEFINE_MUTEX(m); @@ identifier def.m; @@ ( - spin_lock(&m) + mutex_lock(&m) | - spin_unlock(&m) + mutex_unlock(&m) ) // Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall Signed-off-by: Jesper Nilsson --- arch/cris/arch-v32/drivers/pcf8563.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'arch/cris/arch-v32') diff --git a/arch/cris/arch-v32/drivers/pcf8563.c b/arch/cris/arch-v32/drivers/pcf8563.c index 53db3870ba0..f263ab57122 100644 --- a/arch/cris/arch-v32/drivers/pcf8563.c +++ b/arch/cris/arch-v32/drivers/pcf8563.c @@ -229,7 +229,7 @@ int pcf8563_ioctl(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, if (copy_to_user((struct rtc_time *) arg, &tm, sizeof tm)) { - spin_unlock(&rtc_lock); + mutex_unlock(&rtc_lock); return -EFAULT; } -- cgit v1.2.3-70-g09d2