On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 12:26, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 07:19:14AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 02:20, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> > On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 06:18:39PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> >> +static int __devexit adp5588_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
>> >> +{
>> >> + struct adp5588_kpad *kpad = dev_get_drvdata(&client->dev);
>> >> +
>> >> + adp5588_write(client, CFG, 0);
>> >> + free_irq(client->irq, kpad);
>> >
>> > cancel_work_sync() is missing. Could you try the updated version below?
>>
>> i dont think i have any adp5588 hardware. Robin: do we have any in
>> Norwood ? otherwise, it'll have to wait for Michael to get back to
>> double check.
>>
>> > BTW, maybe you shoudl convert to threaded IRQs here?
>>
>> yes, after your suggestion for the previous driver, we've been looking
>> at all our input drivers to convert to threaded IRQs. do we need to
>> convert all of them before acceptance, or can we merge now and post an
>> updated patch after ?
>
> It really depends on the driver. If there is a race between IRQ and the
> WQ in the driver I will request you to fix it one way or another before
> accepting the driver (and quite often using threaded IRQ gets rid of the
> race). In the cases like this particular driver though I am not even
> convinced that we need threaded IRQ. The driver is not expected to
> generate lots of events rapidly so using keventd as it does now is
> probably the best solution.
i dont think there is a race here as we only use the IRQ to schedule
the WQ; we dont read/pass info between the two.
at any rate, i noticed that this driver isnt the final one. i spent
some time cleaning it up a bit more (style, messages, dev_pm_ops), so
i'll merge your changes and mine and post another one.
-mike
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
