[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130304105806.GA28735@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de>
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2013 11:58:06 +0100
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...onic-design.de>
To: Florian Vaussard <florian.vaussard@...l.ch>
Cc: Bryan Wu <cooloney@...il.com>, Richard Purdie <rpurdie@...ys.net>,
Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>,
linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] leds: leds-pwm: Defer led_pwm_set() if PWM can
sleep
On Mon, Mar 04, 2013 at 11:44:22AM +0100, Florian Vaussard wrote:
> Hi Bryan, Richard,
>
> >On 01/30/2013 09:17 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> >>On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 03:00:59PM +0100, Florian Vaussard wrote:
> >>>Call to led_pwm_set() can happen inside atomic context, like triggers.
> >>>If the PWM call can sleep, defer using a worker.
> >>>
> >>>Cc: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>
> >>>Signed-off-by: Florian Vaussard <florian.vaussard@...l.ch>
> >>>---
> >>> drivers/leds/leds-pwm.c | 50
> >>>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> >>> 1 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >>
> >>Bryan, I assume that you'll be taking this? It doesn't apply cleanly to
> >>my tree, probably because of Peter's recent changes that you took
> >>through your tree and Florian based his patches on top of that. The
> >>conflict resolution should be trivial, though.
> >>
> >
> >It seems that this patch was not taken. Could you pull it, as the other
> >part is already in linux-pwm? Or is there any show stopper?
> >
>
> Ping? Who should merge this?
I assume Bryan will take it through the LED tree? Patches 1 & 2 went
into v3.9-rc1 through the PWM tree.
Thierry
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists