On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 05:39:28PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:18:21PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:

> > Remove the bitrotted comment, though in actual fact the use case mentioned
> > is a great use for spi_async() since it would cut down on latency handling
> > the interrupt by saving us a context switch before we start SPI.

> > This was previously implemented, it was removed in commit b534422b2d11
> > (Input: ad7877 - switch to using threaded IRQ) for code complexity reasons.
> > It may be better to revert that commit instead.

> Hmm, maybe.. although I think original would cause device 'stuck' if
> call to spi_async() fails, so probably not a straight revert...

Probably best just to apply this, then - someone can always reimplement
if they need to.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to