From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Slaby Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Input: Accelerated touchscreen support for Marvell Zylonite Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:15:13 +0100 Message-ID: <49ABE9F1.9060201@gmail.com> References: <1236000228-13025-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <49ABE2BC.9010401@gmail.com> <20090302140044.GA23038@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f176.google.com ([209.85.220.176]:43074 "EHLO mail-fx0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751789AbZCBOPS (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Mar 2009 09:15:18 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20090302140044.GA23038@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Cc: Dmitry Torokhov , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2.3.2009 15:00, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 02:44:28PM +0100, Jiri Slaby wrote: >> On 2.3.2009 14:23, Mark Brown wrote: >>> + int count = 16; >>> + schedule_timeout_uninterruptible(1); [...] >>> + while (count< 16) { > >> Weird condition. >> + conding style > > Hrm. This appears to have been mangled somewhere in the mail path to > you - the indentation is normal in my send-mail folder and in the copy I > got back from the list. OK, anyway the condition looks weird on a semantic layer. >>> +static void wm97xx_irq_enable(struct wm97xx *wm, int enable) >>> +{ >>> + if (enable) >>> + enable_irq(wm->pen_irq); >>> + else >>> + disable_irq(wm->pen_irq); > >> sync? > > Could you expand on this, please? No, I was wrong, ignore this one. It's called from within the interrupt it disables.