Re: [PATCH] dma: shdma: transfer based runtime PM

[Vinod Koul]

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

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/