From: Nathan Lynch <nathan.lynch@amd.com>
To: Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@intel.com>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>, <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <dave.jiang@intel.com>, <kristen.c.accardi@intel.com>,
kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] dmaengine: dmatest: Fix dmatest waiting less when interrupted
Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 08:45:55 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <877c428yng.fsf@AUSNATLYNCH.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87ldt7l081.fsf@intel.com>
Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@intel.com> writes:
> Nathan Lynch <nathan.lynch@amd.com> writes:
>
>> Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@intel.com> writes:
>>> Nathan Lynch <nathan.lynch@amd.com> writes:
>>>> dmatest_callback() employs wake_up_all(), which means this change
>>>> introduces no beneficial difference in the wakeup behavior. The dmatest
>>>> thread gets woken on receipt of the completion interrupt either way.
>>>>
>>>> And to reiterate, the change regresses the combination of dmatest and
>>>> the task freezer, which is a use case people have cared about,
>>>> apparently.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If this change in behavior causes a regression for others, glad to send
>>> a revert and find another solution.
>>
>> Thanks - yes it should be reverted or dropped IMO.
>
> Here's what I am thinking, I'll work on this a few days and see if I can
> find an alternative solution and send the revert together with the fix.
> If I can't find another solution in a few days, I'll propose the revert
> anyway.
Just checking on this - I see this regression is in Linus's master
branch now.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-02 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-05 23:00 [PATCH v1] dmaengine: dmatest: Fix dmatest waiting less when interrupted Vinicius Costa Gomes
2025-03-05 23:14 ` Dave Jiang
2025-03-10 21:06 ` Vinod Koul
2025-03-12 18:58 ` Nathan Lynch
2025-03-12 22:13 ` Vinicius Costa Gomes
2025-03-13 14:10 ` Nathan Lynch
2025-03-13 16:36 ` Vinicius Costa Gomes
2025-03-13 21:21 ` Nathan Lynch
2025-03-13 23:29 ` Vinicius Costa Gomes
2025-03-14 21:35 ` Nathan Lynch
2025-03-14 22:24 ` Vinicius Costa Gomes
2025-04-02 13:45 ` Nathan Lynch [this message]
2025-04-03 3:44 ` Vinicius Costa Gomes
2025-04-03 16:24 ` Nathan Lynch
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=877c428yng.fsf@AUSNATLYNCH.amd.com \
--to=nathan.lynch@amd.com \
--cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kristen.c.accardi@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver.sang@intel.com \
--cc=vinicius.gomes@intel.com \
--cc=vkoul@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.