Hi Khali, On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 22:54:59 +0100, Jean Delvare <khali at linux-fr.org> wrote: >> I still go for lm85 locking model, perhaps overdone but seems >> clearly safe. Certainly easy to point at lm85 as reference >> model for write locking in the author / porter guide. > >Absolutely. > >> Then think of reader locking, can drivers simply return >> -error_update_in_progress_uncertain_data_value_try_again ? > >With what benefit, when we can wait a fraction of second and return a >valid value? How driver wait for that? If writer taken lock, is reader blocked? Not as far as I see. Perhaps need yet another lock to do this properly, writer takes exclusive lock, reader takes non-exclusive lock that will block update writers but not other readers. I'll leave this for now as I have other concerns with value readers that may be resolved as I gain some knowledge of the drivers in action. >> Moving on: >> What I do need is a list of drivers that will be handled by >> others, then I'll update the 'orphans', as well as continue >> the DIV_TO_REG removal work in progress. > >Consider all the drivers 'orphans' ;) I mean, changes to a driver are >not reserved to its author. The original author will certainly check >your patches, and give some kind of approval, but that's about it. > >> Is it time for me to learn the 'ticket' system? > >What do you mean? Somewhere I read on lm_sensors to take out 'tickets' so others know what is being developed. > >> Who is documenting this? > >You? :) Yes, well, I did start this particular mess :) I'll repost via686a against -mm2 as new thread. Cheers, Grant.
