linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] spi_bitbang: Add support for non-blocking synchronous transfers

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20090228105908.GA3150@fedora.yogi>
Date:	Sat, 28 Feb 2009 16:29:09 +0530
From:	Balaji Rao <balajirrao@...nmoko.org>
To:	Simon Kagstrom <simon.kagstrom@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	David Brownell <dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net>,
	Andy Green <andy@...nmoko.com>,
	spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] spi_bitbang: Add support for non-blocking
	synchronous transfers

On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 11:15:24AM +0100, Simon Kagstrom wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Feb 2009 15:28:48 +0530
> Balaji Rao <balajirrao@...nmoko.org> wrote:
> 
> > The master is not spi_s3c24xx but spi_s3x24xx_gpio, whose txrx are
> > very simple code.
> > 
> > Additionally all of this has been tested and found to work. The code,
> > along with the modified new spi based lis302dl driver is all in
> > andy-tracking [1].
> 
> Oh, I didn't notice that. Nice then.
> 
> I see from the git logs that this and some other related patches have
> been added now. Another question I have then is about the name: to me 
> spi_non_blocking_transfer() sounds like it would do the opposite of
> what I guess it does - it would go ahead without blocking on the call.
> 

Yes, isn't that what it's supposed to do ? It's going to complete
without putting current to sleep.

> I guess what the name means is that it will not sleep during the call,
> but for pushing it upstream, could it be better to name it something
> else? Perhaps spi_sync and then rename the existing API name (which I
> think is more than a bit strange), or maybe spi_sync_nowait or
> something?

Yes, even I was not terribly happy with 'non_blocking_transfer'.
But I recommend against changing the behaviour of existing functions.
spi_sync_nowait seems good though. 

I hope to get more comments soon. Let's see what other people have to
say.

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