On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Doug Anderson <diand...@chromium.org> wrote:
> Specifically there should be only one instance of spi_pump_messages() > running at a time per master. That's because it's a kthread work > function. ...so we can't possibly get a prepare in the middle of the > unprepare when prepare is called because the only caller to > prepare/unprepare is spi_pump_messages(). Yes that's how the message pump is designed. > I can't comment on whether it's better to do something like add a > workqueue (which might be more obvious / less fragile) or just to add > a comment. I will let others comment on that. :) The message pump initially used a workqueue, but was converted to a kthread because we needed to push the queue to run as realtime for some important low-latency workloads across SPI. The code is basically a tweaked workqueue if you dive down in the implementation. Yours, Linus Walleij ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ spi-devel-general mailing list spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spi-devel-general
