From: Manuel Estrada Sainz <ranty@debian.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH] Proposal to remove workqueue usage from request_firmware_async()
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 15:25:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031021132548.GA20368@ranty.pantax.net> (raw)
Michael Hunold also confirmed that it works for him, IMHO it should be
safe at least for the -mm tree.
The only difference with the previous patch is:
-daemonize("%s/%s", "firmware", fw_work->name);
+daemonize("firmware/%s", fw_work->name);
ChangeLog:
In it's current form request_firmware sleeps for too long on the system's
common workqueue, and using a private workqueue as previously proposed is not
optimal. This patch creates one kernel_thread for each
request_firmware_async() invocation which dies once the job is done.
firmware_class.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
Index: drivers/base/firmware_class.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.5/drivers/base/firmware_class.c (revision 14117)
+++ linux-2.5/drivers/base/firmware_class.c (working copy)
@@ -415,18 +415,22 @@
void (*cont)(const struct firmware *fw, void *context);
};
-static void
+static int
request_firmware_work_func(void *arg)
{
struct firmware_work *fw_work = arg;
const struct firmware *fw;
- if (!arg)
- return;
+ if (!arg) {
+ WARN_ON(1);
+ return 0;
+ }
+ daemonize("firmware/%s", fw_work->name);
request_firmware(&fw, fw_work->name, fw_work->device);
fw_work->cont(fw, fw_work->context);
release_firmware(fw);
module_put(fw_work->module);
kfree(fw_work);
+ return 0;
}
/**
@@ -451,6 +455,8 @@
{
struct firmware_work *fw_work = kmalloc(sizeof (struct firmware_work),
GFP_ATOMIC);
+ int ret;
+
if (!fw_work)
return -ENOMEM;
if (!try_module_get(module)) {
@@ -465,9 +471,14 @@
.context = context,
.cont = cont,
};
- INIT_WORK(&fw_work->work, request_firmware_work_func, fw_work);
- schedule_work(&fw_work->work);
+ ret = kernel_thread(request_firmware_work_func, fw_work,
+ CLONE_FS | CLONE_FILES);
+
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ fw_work->cont(NULL, fw_work->context);
+ return ret;
+ }
return 0;
}
--
--- Manuel Estrada Sainz <ranty@debian.org>
<ranty@bigfoot.com>
<ranty@users.sourceforge.net>
------------------------ <manuel.estrada@hispalinux.es> -------------------
Let us have the serenity to accept the things we cannot change, courage to
change the things we can, and wisdom to know the difference.
next reply other threads:[~2003-10-21 13:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-10-21 13:25 Manuel Estrada Sainz [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-10-20 23:53 [PATCH] Proposal to remove workqueue usage from request_firmware_async() Manuel Estrada Sainz
2003-10-21 0:08 ` Andrew Morton
2003-10-21 9:37 ` Jorge Bernal
2003-10-21 12:44 ` Manuel Estrada Sainz
2003-10-21 12:56 ` Michael Hunold
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=20031021132548.GA20368@ranty.pantax.net \
--to=ranty@debian.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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.