[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150819193117.GA26567@amd>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 21:31:17 +0200
From: Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Jacek Anaszewski <j.anaszewski@...sung.com>,
linux-leds@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
cooloney@...il.com, rpurdie@...ys.net, stsp@...rs.sourceforge.net,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v5 01/57] leds: Add brightness_set_nonblocking op
> > >There are around 60 drivers in the other kernel subsystems that register
> > >LED class devices. If we chose the way you proposed then we would have
> > >to adjust all of them to the LED core changes, which could complicate
> > >the situation during merge window if there were other modifications in
> > >the affected drivers.
>
> You don't need to change anything, if the semantics of
> brightness_set() does not change. All current drivers don't
> sleep. They use a work queue if needed to ensure they don't
> sleep. Hence they are correct.
Exactly. As you explain above, there are 60 reasons not to change
existing semantics.
> By adding a new operation, brightness_set_blocking(), you can strip
> out this work queue and move to the new op member one driver at a
> time. And you can take as long as you want doing this. No flag day
> when an API suddenly means something totally different.
Yes please.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
--
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