[lkml]   [2009]   [Nov]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: linux-next: workqueues tree build failure

11/27/2009 05:37 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
>> Sounds like it should be using bottom half tasklet not workqueue.
>> Tasklet is exactly designed to handle situations like this. Is there
>> any reason tasklet can't be used?
> Right now the h/w accessing code is using mutex. I'm not sure whether
> the deeper part might sleep, though...

Ah... I see. Using mutex from a handler where response time is
critical is strange tho. Anyways, I don't really think singlethread
will satisfy the timing requirement under loaded conditions. IMHO,
update locking and using tasklets would be the best.



 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-27 09:45    [W:0.129 / U:1.604 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site