This is a static checker patch and I don't have this hardware.
This code is unusual because while I've often seen a double lock, this
is the first time I've seen code that takes a lock 11 times in a row. I
feel like I must have missed something. But I've looked very carefully
I don't see any way the original code is correct. Does spi_sync()
somehow release the lock in a way that I can't see? Even if it does,
the locking would still be wrong.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@analog.com>
Acked-by: Cliff Cai <cliff.cai@analog.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Cliff Cai <cliff.cai@analog.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@analog.com>
Acked-by: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@cam.ac.uk>
Signed-off-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>
