On Thu, Jan 21, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Jacek Anaszewski
<j.anaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Heiner,
>
> On 01/10/2016 06:16 PM, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
>>
>> Now that workqueues have been removed from individual drivers and
>> were replaced with a core-internal workqueue we shouldn't
>> encourage people to add new workqueues to drivers.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> include/linux/leds.h | 5 ++++-
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/leds.h b/include/linux/leds.h
>> index bc1476f..4429887 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/leds.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/leds.h
>> @@ -50,7 +50,10 @@ struct led_classdev {
>> #define LED_DEV_CAP_FLASH (1 << 23)
>>
>> /* Set LED brightness level */
>> - /* Must not sleep, use a workqueue if needed */
>> + /* Must not sleep. If no non-blocking version can be provided
>> + * set brightness_set_blocking only. The LED core will use an
>> + * internal work queue to create a non-blocking version.
>> + */
>
>
> This comment isn't easily comprehensible at first glance.
>
> How about:
>
> "Must not sleep. Use brightness_set_blocking for drivers
> that can sleep while setting brightness."
>
Yes, this is better. It's simpler and clearer.
Are you going to fix the comment on your own or would you like me
to submit it as a patch?
Regards, Heiner
>> void (*brightness_set)(struct led_classdev *led_cdev,
>> enum led_brightness brightness);
>> /*
>>
>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Jacek Anaszewski
--
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
