lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4] backlight: corgi_lcd: Use gpio_set_value_cansleep() to avoid WARN_ON
Date
On Monday, December 10, 2012 5:18 PM, Jingoo Han wrote
> On Thursday, December 06, 2012 4:22 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote
> > On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 07:20:00PM +0100, Marko Katić wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 10:30 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux
> > > <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 09:59:07AM +0900, Jingoo Han wrote:
...
> > Eric shares my opinion of the _cansleep() mess, but unfortunately it's
> > what we have and no one's come up with any better solutions to it. (I
> > argued from the outset that the gpio_xxx_cansleep() should've been
> > gpio_xxx() and the non-cansleep() version should be called
> > gpio_xxx_atomic() so that by default people use the version which _can_
> > sleep, but have to think about it when they want to manipulate GPIOs in
> > non-task contexts.)
>
> Hi Russell,
>
> Thank you for your explanation. It is very helpful for getting hold of.
> I have been confused by the current function name such as gpio_xxx_cansleep().
> As you mentioned, gpio_xxx_cansleep()and gpio_xxx_atomic() would be better.

Oh, sorry. There is a mistake.

It should be as below:
'gpio_xxx()and gpio_xxx_atomic() would be better'.


Best regards,
Jingoo Han



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-12-12 10:01    [W:0.104 / U:0.748 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site