On Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:29:00 +0300 m7aalton <matti.j.aaltonen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > So I was taking a quick look at this; it mostly looks OK (though I wonder > > about all those symbol exports - does all that stuff need to be in the > > Some functions get called from both child drivers/modules, but some > stuff could probably be moved from the core to either of the children. > Should I actually do that? Depends. If it's truly only useful to a single child device, the code probably belongs there, without an export. If it's truly a core function, in that (1) it's applicable to multiple devices, or (2) it can't be implemented without exposing stuff you want to keep private to the core, then it should stay in the core. > > What I would suggest you do is remove the completion in favor of a wait > > queue which the interrupt handler can use to signal that something has > > completed. You can then use wait_event() to wait for a wakeup and test > > that the specific condition you are waiting for has come to pass. > > Do you agree with my explanation? Or should I switch to using wait > queue? My belief is that the code would be cleaner with a wait queue; that's the normal pattern for implementing this kind of logic. I'll stop here, though; if others want to take it upstream with the completion, I'll not scream about it. Thanks, jon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
