From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C1D4C169C4 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 16:00:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 630D520855 for ; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 16:00:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727590AbfBHQAs (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2019 11:00:48 -0500 Received: from hs01.dk-develop.de ([173.249.23.66]:35828 "EHLO hs01.dk-develop.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726869AbfBHQAs (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Feb 2019 11:00:48 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 534 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Fri, 08 Feb 2019 11:00:47 EST Received: from mail.dk-develop.de (hs01.dk-develop.de [IPv6:::1]) by hs01.dk-develop.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE9CE1DFEFA; Fri, 8 Feb 2019 16:51:53 +0100 (CET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2019 16:51:53 +0100 From: Danilo Krummrich To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Sven Van Asbroeck , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] Input: ps2-gpio - flush TX work when closing port In-Reply-To: <20190208073102.GA31622@dtor-ws> References: <20190207222740.GA38612@dtor-ws> <20190208073102.GA31622@dtor-ws> Message-ID: X-Sender: danilokrummrich@dk-develop.de User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2019-02-08 08:31, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Thu, Feb 07, 2019 at 06:03:03PM -0500, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 5:27 PM Dmitry Torokhov >> wrote: >> > >> > + flush_work(&drvdata->tx_work.work); >> >> Would cancel_work_sync() be better than flush_work() ? > > No, because we want to have interrupt and gpios in a consistent state. > If we cancel then we need to see if we should disable it or it may > already be disabled, etc. This way we know it is enabled after > flush_delayed_work() returns, and we need to disable it. > > Thanks. I agree with Dmitry - thanks for the fix. Acked-by: Danilo Krummrich