It is prefectly possible to have ir_raw_event_work
running concurently on two cpus, thus we must protect
it from that situation.
Just switch to a thread that we wake up as soon as we have data.
This also ensures that this thread doesn't run unnessesarly.
Signed-off-by: Maxim Levitsky
---
driver
On Thu, 2010-07-29 at 22:42 -0400, Andy Walls wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 05:17 +0300, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> > It is prefectly possible to have ir_raw_event_work
> > running concurently on two cpus, thus we must protect
> > it from that situation.
>
> Yup, the work is marked as not pending (
On Fri, 2010-07-30 at 05:17 +0300, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> It is prefectly possible to have ir_raw_event_work
> running concurently on two cpus, thus we must protect
> it from that situation.
Yup, the work is marked as not pending (and hence reschedulable) just
before the work handler is run.
>
It is prefectly possible to have ir_raw_event_work
running concurently on two cpus, thus we must protect
it from that situation.
Maybe better solution is to ditch the workqueue at all
and use good 'ol thread per receiver, and just wake it up...
Signed-off-by: Maxim Levitsky
---
drivers/media/IR
