Hi Hiroshi, On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 3:58 AM, Hiroshi DOYU <Hiroshi.DOYU@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Does dspbridge really need its own defered work for sending mailbox > messages? We do, according to http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.omap/38240 (thanks Rene for the explanation). > For recieving, its defered work(tasklet) can be trigered directly in > the above proposed callback, that callback can triger its own > workqueue if necessary, then. Agree > I think that, for recieving, some PM > command may has to be sent back immedieately inside of > tasklet. omap_mbox_msg_send_sync() may handle this case. Not sure how much QoS is an issue with mailbox (do we really have latency issues ?), but I guess adding such interface can't hurt. > I think that workqueue is only necessary when it has to sleep, > otherwise tasklet is prefered. I must say I disagree; tasklets are really not friendly to the whole system's responsiveness and should be used only if really needed (there was even an attempt to remove them entirely in the past: http://lwn.net/Articles/239633/). > I'd like to allow mutiple listners in some way, as the flexibility of > mailbox functionalty. This can be achieved using notifier chains of multiple listeners callback, but I agree with Felipe: do we really want this functionality ? I just rather not add code that no one is going to use. What do you say we start with enforcing only 1 listener and later, if the use case of several listeners shows up, we'd add that support (promise! :) ? Thanks, Ohad. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
