Re: [PATCH] ASoC: da7219: Improve the IRQ process to increase the stability

[Mark Brown]

On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 08:06:35AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2023 at 5:10 AM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > Copying in Guenter given the issues he raised with this, not
> > deleting context for his benefit.  It looks like this should
> > avoid the issues with the interrupt appearing locked up.

> It should since it limits the delay to cases where jack_inserted is
> false, but on the other side it hides the delay in an odd way.
> 
...

> Effectively this seems to be quite similar to moving the conditional
> sleep to the place where cancel_work_sync() is called. I would assume
> that will fix the problem (after all, the msleep() is no longer called
> unconditionally), but I don't see the benefit of introducing a worker
> to do that. Also, since there is no guarantee that the worker actually
> started by the time cancel_work_sync() is called, I would suspect that
> it may result in unexpected behavior if the worker has not started by
> that time, which I would assume can happen if the system is heavily
> loaded. It also makes the use of the ground switch (i.e., when to set
> and when to drop it) even more of a mystery than it is right now.

> Having said that, I don't really know or understand the code, so maybe
> this all makes sense and my feedback should be ignored.

Yes, I would certainly welcome more clarity especially around the
ground switch.  OTOH it does seem like an improvement over the
current situation so I think I'll go ahead and apply it for now,
hopefully it can be improved upon in future.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature