On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 10:31:06AM +0100, Tobias Schneider wrote:
(for the interested ones, here is the code..)
One more thing: in case you intend to bring your code mainline, please run scripts/checkpatch.pl on the patches before you submit. The sniplet you posted has a number of style issues that should be fixed. In particular, pay attention to indentation, comment style and parenthesis positions - checkpatch.pl will help pointing out most if them.
Daniel
static int snd_mychip_output_set_put(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol, struct snd_ctl_elem_value *ucontrol) { struct snd_mychip *mychip = snd_kcontrol_chip(kcontrol); int addr = kcontrol->private_value; short change = 0;
spin_lock_irq(&mychip->mixer_lock); if (ucontrol->value.integer.value[0] != mychip->output_set[addr]) { if (dsp_setoutput(addr+1, ucontrol->value.integer.value[0]) >= 0) { mychip->output_set[addr] = ucontrol->value.integer.value[0]; change = 1; } else // error sending signal { change = -EBUSY; // device or resource busy } } spin_unlock_irq(&mychip->mixer_lock); return change; }
later on in the called function... // wait for reply via semaphore while(!end) { if (down_interruptible(&dsp_reply_sema)==-EINTR) // HERE WE GET BUG: scheduling while atomic: amixer/0x00000001/430 ... // waked by signal (terminate), leave thread printk(INFO "reply: catched signal\n"); end=1; break; } printk(INFO "dsp_reply signaled (saved status = %i)\n",stDspReply.status); end=1; ... }