On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 11:16:23AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 05:39:28PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:18:21PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > Remove the bitrotted comment, though in actual fact the use case mentioned > > > is a great use for spi_async() since it would cut down on latency handling > > > the interrupt by saving us a context switch before we start SPI. > > > > This was previously implemented, it was removed in commit b534422b2d11 > > > (Input: ad7877 - switch to using threaded IRQ) for code complexity reasons. > > > It may be better to revert that commit instead. > > > Hmm, maybe.. although I think original would cause device 'stuck' if > > call to spi_async() fails, so probably not a straight revert... > > Probably best just to apply this, then - someone can always reimplement > if they need to. OK, applied. Thanks. -- Dmitry -- 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
