Lars, On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 1:53 AM, Lars-Peter Clausen <l...@metafoo.de> wrote: > Since we sleep inside the protected section we need to use a mutex.
Ah, good point. > It's not the timeout case I'm worried about, but the case where the transfer > is interrupted by the user. Even though it is rather unlikely for the > problem to occur we should still try to avoid it, this is one of these > annoying heisenbugs that happen once in a while and nobody is able to > reproduce them. Yes, of course. Then we can also get extra confidence that the reset logic works well by stressing out this case... :) This makes me think, though. Given how fast we expect the ADC transaction to finish, would there be any benefit to making the wait non-interruptible and then shortening the timeout a whole lot. If we shortened to 1ms then we're really not "non-interruptible" for very long and there's less chance of subtle bugs in the way that reset works. -Doug -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
