linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] ASoC: cs43130: Allow driver to work without IRQ thread

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]

Date:   Mon, 20 Nov 2023 13:51:33 +0000
From:   Maciej Strozek <mstrozek@...nsource.cirrus.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC:     James Schulman <james.schulman@...rus.com>,
        David Rhodes <david.rhodes@...rus.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <patches@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
        <linux-sound@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/7] ASoC: cs43130: Allow driver to work without IRQ
 thread

W dniu pon, 20.11.2023 o godzinie 12∶31 +0000, użytkownik Mark Brown
napisał:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 10:41:53AM +0000, Maciej Strozek wrote:
> > This is to support systems without physical IRQ connection. The
> > device
> > only requires the IRQ for a couple of internal delays, this polling
> > mechanism is a fallback when no IRQ is specified.
> 
> Your changelog here doesn't describe the change - is then intention
> here
> to remove the IRQ thread (and presumably open code?) or to make
> interrupts entirely optional?
> 
> I'm assuming there aren't six more patches in this series?  The whole
> point in numbering patches is to order things, if you're only sending
> one patch you don't need numbering at all.

Apologies, I thought the word "fallback" would describe the intention
of making an optional way for the driver to work in absence of IRQ
rather than removing the IRQ thread. Will send an amended (and
unnumbered) v3.