Sorry about the late reply.
On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 10:17:13PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Nov 2020, Johan Hovold wrote:
> >On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 04:13:07PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> >> Also, but not strictly related to this. What do you think of deferring all
> >> work in
On Mon, 09 Nov 2020, Oliver Neukum wrote:
Am Donnerstag, den 05.11.2020, 22:17 -0800 schrieb Davidlohr Bueso:
@@ -1888,16 +1732,8 @@ static void mos7720_release(struct usb_serial *serial)
usb_set_serial_data(serial, NULL);
mos_parport->serial = NULL;
-
Am Donnerstag, den 05.11.2020, 22:17 -0800 schrieb Davidlohr Bueso:
> @@ -1888,16 +1732,8 @@ static void mos7720_release(struct usb_serial *serial)
> usb_set_serial_data(serial, NULL);
> mos_parport->serial = NULL;
>
> - /* if tasklet currently
On Thu, 05 Nov 2020, Johan Hovold wrote:
On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 04:13:07PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
Also, but not strictly related to this. What do you think of deferring all
work in write_parport_reg_nonblock() unconditionally? I'd like to avoid
that mutex_trylock() because eventually
On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 04:13:07PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Nov 2020, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
> >Hmm. I took at closer look at the parport code and it seems the current
> >implementation is already racy but that removing the tasklet is going to
> >widen that that window.
> >
>
On Wed, 04 Nov 2020, Johan Hovold wrote:
Hmm. I took at closer look at the parport code and it seems the current
implementation is already racy but that removing the tasklet is going to
widen that that window.
Those register writes in restore() should be submitted before any
later requests.
On Wed, Nov 04, 2020 at 12:06:57PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 12:40:14PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > On Mon, 02 Nov 2020, Bueso wrote:
> >
> > >There is
> > >also no need anymore for atomic allocations.
> >
> > Bleh this is a brain fart - obviously not true as
On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 12:40:14PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Mon, 02 Nov 2020, Bueso wrote:
>
> >There is
> >also no need anymore for atomic allocations.
>
> Bleh this is a brain fart - obviously not true as usb_submit_urb() is
> called under mos_parport->listlock. I'll send a v2 unless
On Mon, 02 Nov 2020, Bueso wrote:
There is
also no need anymore for atomic allocations.
Bleh this is a brain fart - obviously not true as usb_submit_urb() is
called under mos_parport->listlock. I'll send a v2 unless you have
any objections.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
9 matches
Mail list logo