Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Jun 2005 23:29:00 +0400 | From | Stas Sergeev <> | Subject | Re: [patch 2/2] pcspeaker driver update |
| |
Hello.
Vojtech Pavlik wrote: >> - changes the pcspeaker driver to >> use the i8253_lock instead of i8253_beep_lock > This doesn't seem right. The driver programs an independent part of the > chip and I don't see a reason to cause the time code to wait because > we're trying to do a beep. Yes, you program 0x42 which is independant, but, unless I am missing something, you also touch 0x43 and 0x61, which are not, and so I thought it would be better to just use the i8253_lock alltogether. And it doesn't look like the lock is held during the entire beep, so it probably doesn't really make anything to wait for too long. What am I missing?
> Can't you just use input_grab() for this? I am not sure, I thought I can't. I looked at the code and it seems input_event() would call the dev->event() regardless, and only at the bottom - dev->grab->handler->event(). While it seems like I want to prevent the dev->event() from being called, at the first place. And it doesn't look like the grab functionality is described in Documentation/input at all, and no examples around the code that I could use. So I just don't know what functionality is that... Will try to play around it and maybe I'll figure something out:)
> SND_SUSPEND really seems > inappropriate, since it's not a sound event. Is it just a problem of the name (i.e. would the SND_STOP be better), or is it conceptually wrong? (I guess for both:)
>> Can this please be applied? > Not yet. OK. I'll try to find the better solution. Let's just apply the first patch then - it is a cleanup, I don't think it could do any harm.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |