From: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
To: <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Harvey Hunt <harvey.hunt@imgtec.com>,
Alex Smith <alex.smith@imgtec.com>,
Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@axis.com>,
Alex Smith <alex@alex-smith.me.uk>
Subject: [PATCH] mtd: nand: check status before reporting timeout
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 17:19:23 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1457140763-67571-1-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com> (raw)
In commit b70af9bef49b ("mtd: nand: increase ready wait timeout and
report timeouts"), we increased the likelihood of scheduling during
nand_wait(). This makes us more likely to hit the time_before(...)
condition, since a lot of time may pass before we get scheduled again.
Now, the loop was already buggy, since we don't check if the NAND is
ready after exiting the loop; we simply print out a timeout warning. Fix
this by doing a final status check before printing a timeout message.
This isn't actually a critical bug, since the only effect is a false
warning print. But too many prints never hurt anyone, did they? :)
Side note: perhaps I'm not smart enough, but I'm not sure what the best
policy is for this kind of loop; do we busy loop (i.e., no
cond_resched()) to keep the lowest I/O latency (it's not great if the
resched is delaying Richard's system ~400ms)? Or do we allow
rescheduling, to play nice with the rest of the system (since some
operations can take quite a while)?
Reported-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
Reviewed-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Reviewed-by: Harvey Hunt <harvey.hunt@imgtec.com>
---
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
index f2c8ff398d6c..596a9b0503da 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
@@ -566,8 +566,8 @@ void nand_wait_ready(struct mtd_info *mtd)
cond_resched();
} while (time_before(jiffies, timeo));
- pr_warn_ratelimited(
- "timeout while waiting for chip to become ready\n");
+ if (!chip->dev_ready(mtd))
+ pr_warn_ratelimited("timeout while waiting for chip to become ready\n");
out:
led_trigger_event(nand_led_trigger, LED_OFF);
}
--
2.7.0.rc3.207.g0ac5344
next reply other threads:[~2016-03-05 1:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-05 1:19 Brian Norris [this message]
2016-03-07 21:51 ` [PATCH] mtd: nand: check status before reporting timeout Brian Norris
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1457140763-67571-1-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--to=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=alex.smith@imgtec.com \
--cc=alex@alex-smith.me.uk \
--cc=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--cc=harvey.hunt@imgtec.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=niklas.cassel@axis.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.