[alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: si476x: Remove custom register I/O implementation

Mark Brown broonie at kernel.org
Fri Sep 27 19:02:32 CEST 2013

On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 08:53:58AM -0700, Andrey Smirnov wrote:

> > OK, so if it's purely about send_command() then why is the locking not
> > being done in that function?  Surely the most obvious and robust place
> > to protect the function is within the function itself?

> Not having send_command acquire any locks allows me to have variable
> levels of granularity of locking, for example in the worker thread
> that fetches RDS data from the chip it allows me to get exclusive
> access to the chip for the duration of the FIFO draining. Also any
> band switch for that chip, like AM to FM, etc. require chip to be
> power cycled which translates to multiple calls to send_command as
> well, I think having those performed atomically simplifies the driver
> as well.

Right, so it's not just protecting send_command() but is instead
protecting higher level things.  In that case shouldn't the locking be
performed further up in this driver too rather than on each register
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/attachments/20130927/320f4bb9/attachment.sig>

More information about the Alsa-devel mailing list