On 30 October 2017 9:37:37 p.m. GMT+00:00, Kees Cook <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 4:48 AM, Johan Hovold <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:44:22AM +0000, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 30/10/17 11:38, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>> > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:35:50AM +0000, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
>>> >> On 30/10/17 11:32, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>> >>> The right thing to do here is to respin your patch from last
>year which
>>> >>> converts the loopback driver to use the timeout handling in
>greybus
>>> >>> core.
>>> >>
>>> >> Actually I wasn't clear if you wanted to to that yourself aswell
>as the
>>> >> rest if it.
>>> >>
>>> >> But sure I can do that conversion, it's on my list.
>>> >
>>> > IIRC it was basically done. Just some odd locking that could now
>also be
>>> > removed.
>>> >
>>> > Thanks,
>>> > Johan
>>> >
>>>
>>> I think once Kees' change is applied to operation.c and we convert
>the
>>> async stuff to operation.c's callbacks there ought to be no use of
>>> timers, linked lists of operations.
>>
>> That's correct.
>>
>>> I'll probably need at least a day to look at that, so it'll be the
>>> weekend before I can really allocate time.
>>
>> Cool. I'm quite sure I just rebased your loopback conversion patch on
>my
>> core timeout handling and used that to test the core implementation,
>so
>> it should be straight forward.
>
>Hi,
>
>I seem to have lost the thread of conversation a bit. What exactly
>remains that I should be doing here for timer conversions? (It sounded
>like it was already partially handled already?)
>
>-Kees
Trying again without top posting in html :(
Just pair the patch down to operation.c.
There's a separate change to loopback.c an old patch ARAIR that will subtract use of the timer from loopback.c so you can skip that bit.
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
From 1582720577787861283@xxx Mon Oct 30 21:46:05 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1582126742408023281
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums