[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b170af451002270133v6c44a6bcnf5751a6338c61a63@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 10:33:46 +0100
From: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
To: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
DRI <dri-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] time: add wait_interruptible_timeout macro to sleep
(w. timeout) until wake_up
W dniu 26 lutego 2010 20:01 użytkownik Ville Syrjälä <syrjala@....fi> napisał:
> Disabling the condition check doesn't make sense.
>
> You could use a completion.
>
> init_completion(vbl_irq);
> enable_vbl_irq();
> wait_for_completion(vbl_irq);
> disable_vbl_irq();
> and call complete(vbl_irq) in the interrupt handler.
>
> The same would of course work with just some flag or counter
> and a wait queue.
Ouch, I can see it gone bad already.
Firstly I simply just wanted to avoid condition in wait_event_*. It
looked unnecessary as I got interrupts (signals). So I started playing
with other solutions (like my wait_interruptible_timeout where I had
not full understanding of waking up) and finally started analyzing
over-complex things like completions.
I'll just use some one more variable and some more basic solution.
Thanks for help and sorry for taking your time. I hope to provide at
least some of you dynamic radeon PM in return :)
--
Rafał
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists