lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 01/24] input: Add ff-memless-next module
Date
On Wednesday 23 of April 2014 14:12:59 Oliver Neukum wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-04-22 at 15:59 +0200, Michal Malý wrote:
> > +/* Some devices might have a limit on how many uncombinable effects
> > + * can be played at once */
> > +static int mlnx_upload_conditional(struct mlnx_device *mlnxdev,
> > + const struct ff_effect *effect)
> > +{
> > + struct mlnx_effect_command ecmd = {
> > + .cmd = MLNX_UPLOAD_UNCOMB,
> > + .u.uncomb.id = effect->id,
> > + .u.uncomb.effect = effect
> > + };
> > + return mlnxdev->control_effect(mlnxdev->dev, mlnxdev->private,
> > &ecmd);
> > +}
> > +
>
> This mean you are building the structure on the stack
>
> 1. Are you sure nobody retains a reference?
Yes. The command is a one-shot thing so it makes no sense to hold a persistent
reference to it. Should the HW-specific driver need to keep any data from the
command - if the uses a workqueue to submit data to the device for instance -
it should keep its own copy of the data. The idea is to keep MLNX and HW-
specific driver as separated as possible to prevent any race conditions.

> 2. That is needlessly inefficient
Are you suggesting I drop the 'consts' and keep the memory preallocated?

Thanks for the feedback,
Michal

--
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-23 14:41    [W:0.302 / U:0.768 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site