On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 11:57:50AM -0700, Bryan Wu wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Ian Lartey <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > + spinlock_t value_lock; > >> I think you don't need this spinlock to protect the value, the mutex is enough. > > You need to use a spinlock because values can be set from hard IRQ > context so you can't take a mutex there. Someone should really factor > this out into the framework in their copious free time, the set and > schedule pattern is very common in drivers. Ah, exactly. I think I provided a patch before to add those schedule workqueue stuff into the leds frameworks. But don't have time to update it according to the review. Thanks, -Bryan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-leds" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
