On Sat, 2010-02-27 at 10:33 +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > W dniu 26 lutego 2010 20:01 użytkownik Ville Syrjälä <syrj...@sci.fi> napisał: > > Disabling the condition check doesn't make sense. > > > > You could use a completion. > > > > init_completion(vbl_irq); > > enable_vbl_irq(); > > wait_for_completion(vbl_irq); > > disable_vbl_irq(); > > and call complete(vbl_irq) in the interrupt handler. > > > > The same would of course work with just some flag or counter > > and a wait queue. > > Ouch, I can see it gone bad already. > > Firstly I simply just wanted to avoid condition in wait_event_*. It > looked unnecessary as I got interrupts (signals).
So this code runs in user process context? If so, it should return to userspace ASAP on signal receipt, otherwise e.g. smoothness of X mouse movement may suffer. If that's a problem, then maybe the code should run in a different context, e.g. a tasklet or some kind of worker kernel thread. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer | http://www.vmware.com Libre software enthusiast | Debian, X and DRI developer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance. See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev -- _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list Dri-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
