On 09/10/2013 06:16 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
Hi Guenter
I agree to use gpio_set_debounce() API but, I suggest following patch to code clean.
and I'd like you to use declarative sentence on patch name instead of 'If ...'.
On 08/30/2013 01:29 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c b/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c
index 77d35a7..973600e 100644
--- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c
+++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c
@@ -111,6 +111,11 @@ static int gpio_extcon_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
if (ret < 0)
goto err;
+ /* Use gpio debounce if available. If so, don't debounce in software. */
+ if (pdata->debounce &&
+ !gpio_set_debounce(extcon_data->gpio, pdata->debounce * 1000))
+ extcon_data->debounce_jiffies = 0;
+
INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&extcon_data->work, gpio_extcon_work);
extcon_data->irq = gpio_to_irq(extcon_data->gpio);
diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c b/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c
index 3943ce2..0777e72 100644
--- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c
+++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c
@@ -56,8 +56,10 @@ static irqreturn_t gpio_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
{
struct gpio_extcon_data *extcon_data = dev_id;
- queue_delayed_work(system_power_efficient_wq, &extcon_data->work,
- extcon_data->debounce_jiffies);
+ if (extcon_data->debounce_jiffies)
+ queue_delayed_work(system_power_efficient_wq,
+ &extcon_data->work,
+ extcon_data->debounce_jiffies);
I am a bit lost about this one. The above means that the workqueue would not be executed
at all if debounce_jiffies is 0 (and if pdata->debounce is 0), meaning an event would
never be generated. With the original code, the workqueue will be executed immediately
if debounce_jiffies is 0, which I think is exactly what we need.
return IRQ_HANDLED;
}
@@ -100,7 +102,14 @@ static int gpio_extcon_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
extcon_data->state_off = pdata->state_off;
if (pdata->state_on && pdata->state_off)
extcon_data->edev.print_state = extcon_gpio_print_state;
- extcon_data->debounce_jiffies = msecs_to_jiffies(pdata->debounce);
+ extcon_data->debounce_jiffies = 0;
+ if (pdata->debounce) {
+ ret = gpio_set_debounce(extcon_data->gpio,
+ pdata->debounce * 1000);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ extcon_data->debounce_jiffies =
+ msecs_to_jiffies(pdata->debounce);
+ }
Ok, though it is unnecessary to initialize debounce_jiffies (it is pre-initialized
from the allocation), so I'll drop that line.
ret = extcon_dev_register(&extcon_data->edev, &pdev->dev);
if (ret < 0)
@@ -111,11 +120,6 @@ static int gpio_extcon_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
if (ret < 0)
goto err;
- /* Use gpio debounce if available. If so, don't debounce in software. */
- if (pdata->debounce &&
- !gpio_set_debounce(extcon_data->gpio, pdata->debounce * 1000))
- extcon_data->debounce_jiffies = 0;
-
INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&extcon_data->work, gpio_extcon_work);
extcon_data->irq = gpio_to_irq(extcon_data->gpio);
@@ -146,7 +150,8 @@ static int gpio_extcon_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
struct gpio_extcon_data *extcon_data = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
- cancel_delayed_work_sync(&extcon_data->work);
+ if (extcon_data->debounce_jiffies)
+ cancel_delayed_work_sync(&extcon_data->work);
I think we would have to call cancel_work_sync() in the else case to make sure
that no work is in the process of being executed - which just turns out to execute
the same code as cancel_delayed_work_sync(). So the if/else would just add complexity
with no real gain.
Thanks,
Guenter
free_irq(extcon_data->irq, extcon_data);
extcon_dev_unregister(&extcon_data->edev);
Thanks,
Chanwoo Choi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
