>On Friday, February 28, 2014 11:49 PM, Chase Southwood ><chase.southw...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>On Friday, February 28, 2014 11:26 AM, Ian Abbott <abbo...@mev.co.uk> wrote: >>>On 2014-02-28 07:35, Chase Southwood wrote: [snip] >>In the case of s626_send_dac(), it doesn't seem to be used in any >>critical sections, so it could make use of Hartley's comedi_timeout(). >> >>Some of the timeout errors could be propagated, especially for >>s626_send_dac() which is only reachable from very few paths. > > >Awesome, I'll swap all of my timeouts out for comedi_timeout() in >s626_send_dac(). Actually, after taking another look at this, I don't think that using comedi_timeout() here is going to work, actually. The context from which s626_send_dac() is called allows sleep all right, but readl() isn't a comedi function and therefore it doesn't behave (in parameters or return values) as the callback function parameter to comedi_timeout() requires. So unless I'm missing something particularly large here, I believe we'll have to do the timeouts here manually as well. Am I correct here, and if so, would you like the iteration based timeouts here as well, or a sleep-based timeout similar to that employed by comedi_timeout()? Thanks, Chase _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
