From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Patrick Pannuto <ppannuto@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
Israel Schlesinger <israels@codeaurora.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, apw@canonical.com, joe@perches.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add warnings for use of mdelay()
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 2010 12:16:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100727121610.64b38cfa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C4F1846.3090103@codeaurora.org>
On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:32:54 -0700
Patrick Pannuto <ppannuto@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 07/27/2010 10:31 AM, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:11:11 -0700
> > Israel Schlesinger <israels@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> >
> >> mdelay is a busy-wait loop which is wasteful. If at all possible,
> >> callers should use msleep instead of mdelay.
> >>
> >> The only time mdelay is really appropriate is in atomic context,
> >> however, delays of 1ms+ in atomic context are rather expensive, so
> >> a warning for this case is probably appropriate as well to encourage
> >> people to move such expensive delays outside of atomic context
> >
> > Once upon a time, msleep(1) would sleep for 20ms, while mdelay(1) gave
> > a 1ms delay. My patch to fix msleep() at that time didn't get in due
> > to concerns about the cost of using hrtimers. Perhaps msleep() has
> > gotten better, but, if not, actually getting a 1ms delay remains a
> > valid reason for using mdelay() instead IMO. It made a difference of a
> > few seconds at open time for a driver I was doing at the time.
> >
> > jon
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
> Check out the recently added usleep in -tip, and the checkpatch patch
> pending in my queue that fixes that case (I'll send in a few hours ;) )
>
The message should point people at usleep_range(), I'd suggest. It's a
more power-friendly way of sleeping.
That assumes that the below patch gets merged - the people who handle
timer-related things are presently, err, asleep.
From: Patrick Pannuto <ppannuto@codeaurora.org>
usleep[_range] are finer precision implementations of msleep and are
designed to be drop-in replacements for udelay where a precise sleep /
busy-wait is unnecessary. They also allow an easy interface to specify
slack when a precise (ish) wakeup is unnecessary to help minimize wakeups
Signed-off-by: Patrick Pannuto <ppannuto@codeaurora.org>
Acked-by: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
---
include/linux/delay.h | 6 ++++++
kernel/timer.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 28 insertions(+)
diff -puN include/linux/delay.h~timers-add-usleep-timer include/linux/delay.h
--- a/include/linux/delay.h~timers-add-usleep-timer
+++ a/include/linux/delay.h
@@ -45,6 +45,12 @@ extern unsigned long lpj_fine;
void calibrate_delay(void);
void msleep(unsigned int msecs);
unsigned long msleep_interruptible(unsigned int msecs);
+void usleep_range(unsigned long min, unsigned long max);
+
+static inline void usleep(unsigned long usecs)
+{
+ usleep_range(usecs, usecs);
+}
static inline void ssleep(unsigned int seconds)
{
diff -puN kernel/timer.c~timers-add-usleep-timer kernel/timer.c
--- a/kernel/timer.c~timers-add-usleep-timer
+++ a/kernel/timer.c
@@ -1763,3 +1763,25 @@ unsigned long msleep_interruptible(unsig
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(msleep_interruptible);
+
+static int __sched do_usleep_range(unsigned long min, unsigned long max)
+{
+ ktime_t kmin;
+ unsigned long delta;
+
+ kmin = ktime_set(0, min * NSEC_PER_USEC);
+ delta = max - min;
+ return schedule_hrtimeout_range(&kmin, delta, HRTIMER_MODE_REL);
+}
+
+/**
+ * usleep_range - Drop in replacement for udelay where wakeup is flexible
+ * @min: Minimum time in usecs to sleep
+ * @max: Maximum time in usecs to sleep
+ */
+void usleep_range(unsigned long min, unsigned long max)
+{
+ __set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
+ do_usleep_range(min, max);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(usleep_range);
_
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-27 19:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-27 17:11 [PATCH] checkpatch: Add warnings for use of mdelay() Israel Schlesinger
2010-07-27 17:22 ` Joe Perches
2010-07-27 17:31 ` Jonathan Corbet
2010-07-27 17:32 ` Patrick Pannuto
2010-07-27 19:16 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2010-07-28 9:44 ` Andy Whitcroft
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-07-04 18:18 Prakruthi Deepak Heragu
2018-07-04 18:30 ` Joe Perches
2018-07-05 8:19 ` Dan Carpenter
2018-07-06 5:49 ` Julia Lawall
2018-07-07 12:09 ` Jia-Ju Bai
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=20100727121610.64b38cfa.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=apw@canonical.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=israels@codeaurora.org \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=ppannuto@codeaurora.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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.