pp_cam_entry->cb_task need not to be _NOAUTOREL ... because in fact it is
never used ???
Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]>
--- WQ/drivers/media/video/cpia_pp.c~3_cpia_pp 2006-12-17 19:06:40.000000000 +0300
+++ WQ/drivers/media/video/cpia_pp.c 2007-02-19 00:27:41.000000000 +0300
@@ -141,7 +141,6 @@ static void cpia_pp_run_callback(struct
cam = container_of(work, struct pp_cam_entry, cb_task);
cb_func = cam->cb_func;
cb_data = cam->cb_data;
- work_release(work);
cb_func(cb_data);
}
@@ -682,7 +681,7 @@ static int cpia_pp_registerCallback(void
if(cam->port->irq != PARPORT_IRQ_NONE) {
cam->cb_func = cb;
cam->cb_data = cbdata;
- INIT_WORK_NAR(&cam->cb_task, cpia_pp_run_callback);
+ INIT_WORK(&cam->cb_task, cpia_pp_run_callback);
} else {
retval = -1;
}
Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]> wrote:
> pp_cam_entry->cb_task need not to be _NOAUTOREL ... because in fact it is
> never used ???
That's a remarkably good point. Did something get deleted since I made my
modifications? Perhaps the workqueue stuff in that file should just be
deleted entirely.
Acked-By: David Howells <[email protected]>
On 02/19, David Howells wrote:
>
> Oleg Nesterov <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > pp_cam_entry->cb_task need not to be _NOAUTOREL ... because in fact it is
> > never used ???
>
> That's a remarkably good point. Did something get deleted since I made my
> modifications?
At first I thought the same. But no, it looks unused as well in 2.6.18.
> Perhaps the workqueue stuff in that file should just be
> deleted entirely.
I think yes.
> Acked-By: David Howells <[email protected]>
Thanks.
Oleg.