Re: [PATCH v2] Input: da9052_tsi: remove unnecessary worker

[Michael Grzeschik <mgr@pengutronix.de>]

On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 03:24:48PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 06, 2015 at 12:05:48PM +0100, Michael Grzeschik wrote:
> > With the datardy irq we get the information if the
> > pen got pulled from the screen. This patch changes
> > the irq by checking this condition every time instead
> > of triggering the worker.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Michael Grzeschik <m.grzeschik@pengutronix.de>
> > ---
> > v1 -> v2: - removed adc_on variable
> > 	  - added locking for irq switch
> > 	  - event reporting in ts_read and irq switchover in datardy_irq
> >  drivers/input/touchscreen/da9052_tsi.c | 119 +++++++++++++++++----------------
> >  1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/da9052_tsi.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/da9052_tsi.c
> > index 5a013bb..c28cfee 100644
> > --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/da9052_tsi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/da9052_tsi.c
> > @@ -22,19 +22,24 @@
> >  
> >  #define TSI_PEN_DOWN_STATUS 0x40
> >  
> > +#define TSI_PEN_UP		1
> > +
> >  struct da9052_tsi {
> >  	struct da9052 *da9052;
> >  	struct input_dev *dev;
> > -	struct delayed_work ts_pen_work;
> >  	struct mutex mutex;
> > +	spinlock_t *lock;
> 
> I am gonna go out on a limb and say that you did not test it.

I was testing exactly this. It seems i did miss that pointer and it
still worked.

Beside that, do you think it would be better to split the patch up?

Regards,
Michael

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |