Thanks Arun for the link. This clears up things for me.
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 3:28 AM, Arun KS wrote:
> Hello Roshan,
>
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Roshan A wrote:
>>
>> hi all,
>>
>> My question is regarding the correct use of workqueues. I have a
>> driver which queues a work item in
Hello Roshan,
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 2:20 PM, Roshan A wrote:
>
> hi all,
>
> My question is regarding the correct use of workqueues. I have a
> driver which queues a work item in the interrupt handler. The bottom
> half function ( the workitem -function ) does have proper locking (
> mutex ) in
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Anish Kumar
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>> On Feb 10, 2015, at 12:50 AM, Roshan A wrote:
>>
>> hi all,
>>
>> My question is regarding the correct use of workqueues. I have a
>> driver which queues a work item in the interrupt handler. The bottom
>> half function ( the workitem
> On Feb 10, 2015, at 12:50 AM, Roshan A wrote:
>
> hi all,
>
> My question is regarding the correct use of workqueues. I have a
> driver which queues a work item in the interrupt handler. The bottom
> half function ( the workitem -function ) does have proper locking (
> mutex ) in place for
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 1:50 AM, Roshan A wrote:
> hi all,
>
> My question is regarding the correct use of workqueues. I have a
> driver which queues a work item in the interrupt handler. The bottom
> half function ( the workitem -function ) does have proper locking (
> mutex ) in place for atomic
hi all,
My question is regarding the correct use of workqueues. I have a
driver which queues a work item in the interrupt handler. The bottom
half function ( the workitem -function ) does have proper locking (
mutex ) in place for atomicity.
With this setup, since the interrupts are enabled, it's
