Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] dma: shdma: transfer based runtime PM | From | Vinod Koul <> | Date | Mon, 05 Sep 2011 18:36:04 +0530 |
| |
On Mon, 2011-09-05 at 10:10 +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > Hi Vinod > > On Tue, 30 Aug 2011, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: Please dont top post... > > Sorry, I see it differently. I don't use any counters in my patch. I'm > > only checking for empty queue, i.e., I'm just identifying the first > > descriptor submission and the last completion or termination. > > > > > You juts need > > > to call _put/_get at right places, which IMO l;ooks lot simpler than > > > current approach > > > > If we didn't have to check for exact symmetry, then yes, I agree, this > > would be cleaner. I.e., if we indeed had well-defined entry- and > > exit-points, which are guaranteed to be called exact same number of times. > > Like, e.g., with file open() / close() etc. But since we don't have this > > symmetry, and instead have to add flags and iterate lists, this doesn't > > look natural and simple to me anymore, sorry. > > What about this one? Would you be prepared to take it as is, or you still > think, that a pm_runtime_get*() on each descriptor submission would be > better? I think I will go with your current approach. Let me review again and check it. If I get time it should be in my tree by tonight
-- ~Vinod
| |