Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751476AbZCHI3W (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Mar 2009 04:29:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751169AbZCHI3M (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Mar 2009 04:29:12 -0400 Received: from atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz ([195.113.26.193]:51218 "EHLO atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750870AbZCHI3L (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Mar 2009 04:29:11 -0400 Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2009 09:29:02 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Cc: kernel list , rpurdie@rpsys.net Subject: Re: introduce delayed-leds.h to reduce code duplication Message-ID: <20090308082902.GC1371@ucw.cz> References: <20090111224331.GA28010@elf.ucw.cz> <20090112100500.GA31656@khazad-dum.debian.net> <20090119150219.GA6463@ucw.cz> <20090120120400.GA15144@khazad-dum.debian.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090120120400.GA15144@khazad-dum.debian.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1797 Lines: 42 On Tue 2009-01-20 10:04:00, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Mon, 19 Jan 2009, Pavel Machek wrote: > > On Mon 2009-01-12 08:05:01, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > > On Sun, 11 Jan 2009, Pavel Machek wrote: > > > > What about something like this? > > > > > > > > [Alternatively, I can add a flag to the leds class, and make delayed > > > > leds a built-in functionality...] > > > > > > > > [Attached is driver that uses new infrastructure for hp_accel, but it > > > > does a bit more.] > > > > > > FWIW, I am looking over the thinkpad-acpi side of this. I like the idea, > > > but I am not completely sure I agree fully with the changes to > > > thinkpad-acpi. > > > > > > Which isn't a problem, as long as the thinkpad-acpi hunks are NOT merged to > > > any tree before my ACK, please. I will test and comment on the patch before > > > the weekend. > > > > Any news? > > Sure. Sorry for not replying earlier. > > I don't like the loss of functionality of the private workqueue. I kicked > the thinkpad led handling to a private workqueue in order to never tie up > the system-wide one with crap spinning around in the ACPI layer, etc. In > fact, all thinkpad-acpi deferred work is in the private workqueue for this > reason. Is the private workqueue really required? AFAICT workqueues are not exactly cheap, and leds are not toggled that often. Was it problem in practice? Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/