Geoff Thorpe wrote:
> So from this user's perspective (FWIW), it would come as a surprise if
> the return value reflected the evaluated expression rather than what
> happened w.r.t. the spin/timeout.
It shouldn't come as a surprise because I've thoroughly documented the
behavior. I also think returning the actual value of the expression is better
than a return code. Remember, the primary purpose of this macro is to wait for
a hardware register to change. Contrast this to wait_event_xxx, which usually
queries a variable. Therefore, the hardware register may set multiple bits.
For instance, you could do this:
ret = spin_event_timeout(in_be32(x) & 0x14, ...);
if (ret & 0x10)
do something here
if (ret & 0x04)
do something else here
I think the ability to do this is more important than making the code as
similar as possible to wait_event_xxx.
--
Timur Tabi
Linux kernel developer at Freescale
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
