On Mon, 2010-07-26 at 13:18 +0200, ext Taneja, Archit wrote: > I am not sure about this, it can be probably aligned with what is done in > update_screen_l4(). I didn't exaclty get why you block till > fifo_stalls > 0xfffff and if we can have a similar reasoning for send_long? > > It would be great though if we can make dsi_vc_send_long() configurable enough > to be actually used in dsi_update_screen_l4(), because they both have enough > common code beween them. dsi_update_screen_l4() is quite old and unused code. I was mainly trying out how CPU can be used for DSI transfer, and trying out different ways to get better performance. You shouldn't look at it as any reference =). The 0xfffff was just a random number to abort the transfer if it didn't seem to go through. It worked for me, but probably won't work for other cases. I don't think that anyone really wants to update the screen with CPU, so the code could even be removed. Tomi -- 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
