Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] firmware_class: Use swait instead of completion

From	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] firmware_class: Use swait instead of completion
Date	2016-08-24 02:00 +0200
Message-ID	<s9tLQ-2xb-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<s9fSx-1R4-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <s9fSx-1R4-105@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 11:00:20AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> From: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
> 
> complete_all() can only be issued once before it needs to be
> reinitialized. 

What are the chances this ever happened? If it could not happen its
worth explaining why.

> To ensure we never call complete_all() twice we use
> swait and make the code here a bit more robust.

The real benefit here though is not that is it? Isn't the benefit that
we don't need all the API functionality provided by wait, we just need
something light weight.

Thanks for splitting this up, it makes it for a much easier review.

  Luis

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH v2 2/2] firmware_class: Use swait instead of completion Daniel Wagner <wagi@monom.org> - 2016-08-23 11:10 +0200
  Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] firmware_class: Use swait instead of completion "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org> - 2016-08-24 02:00 +0200

csiph-web