From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S1751212AbWFGSRG@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751212AbWFGSRG (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Wed, 7 Jun 2006 14:17:06 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751213AbWFGSRG
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Wed, 7 Jun 2006 14:17:06 -0400
Received: from sc-outsmtp1.homechoice.co.uk ([81.1.65.35]:18692 "HELO
	sc-outsmtp1.homechoice.co.uk") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP
	id S1751212AbWFGSRF (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 7 Jun 2006 14:17:05 -0400
Subject: Re: [Alsa-devel] [linuxsh-dev] [PATCH] Add support for
	Yamaha	AICA	sound on	SEGA Dreamcast
From: Adrian McMenamin <adrian@mcmen.demon.co.uk>
To: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
       Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-sh <linuxsh-dev@lists.sourceforge.net>
In-Reply-To: <s5h8xo970q7.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
References: <1149201071.9032.13.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <1149334788.9065.5.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <s5hslmimvh5.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
	 <1149635448.5154.7.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <s5h8xo970q7.wl%tiwai@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain
Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2006 19:16:42 +0100
Message-Id: <1149704202.5087.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.6.1 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2006-06-07 at 11:51 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Wed, 07 Jun 2006 00:10:48 +0100,
> Adrian McMenamin wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 2006-06-06 at 12:25 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > 
> > > Another big concern is that spu_dma_work is initialized/rewritten
> > > dynamically in spu_begin_dma() and aica_period_elapsed() via
> > > INIT_WORK() and PREPARE_WOR().  This looks pretty strange and may be
> > > racy.
> > 
> > Actually, the two macros INIT_WORK and PREPARE_WORK use the same work
> > queue but ask it to schedule the execution of two different (if very
> > similar) functions start_spu_dma() - which does the initial transfer and
> > more_spu_dma - which tops up the dma transfers.
> > 
> > So I think I've got that right.
> 
> What's wrong with using two individual work struct so that you
> initialize them only once?
> I wonder it because you already have unused fields work and work2...
> 
They've gone actually.

I need to initialise them because every call is a discrete processing
job - ie I send one thing to go, then when a period has elapsed I
schedule another transfer to run on the kernel thread.

Isn't this the way it is meant to work?