alsa-devel.alsa-project.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arun Raghavan <arun.raghavan@collabora.co.uk>
To: David Henningsson <david.henningsson@canonical.com>
Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ALSA: HDA: Lessen CPU usage when waiting for chip to respond
Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 01:35:52 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1336507552.5353.3.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1336122355-6017-1-git-send-email-david.henningsson@canonical.com>

On Fri, 2012-05-04 at 11:05 +0200, David Henningsson wrote:
> When an IRQ for some reason gets lost, we wait up to a second using
> udelay, which is CPU intensive. This patch improves the situation by
> waiting about 30 ms in the CPU intensive mode, then stepping down to
> using msleep(2) instead. In essence, we trade some granularity in
> exchange for less CPU consumption when the waiting time is a bit longer.
> 
> As a result, PulseAudio should no longer be killed by the kernel
> for taking up to much RT-prio CPU time. At least not for *this* reason.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Henningsson <david.henningsson@canonical.com>
> ---
>  sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c |    6 ++++--
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> Hi Arun,
> 
> Can you check if this patch resolves your problem with PulseAudio getting
> killed by the kernel? If so, we should apply it to the kernel, perhaps even
> to stable.
> 
> // David

Thanks, this fixes the problem for me. Don't know what the official
procedure for these things is, but fwiw:

Signed-off-by: Arun Raghavan <arun.raghavan@collabora.co.uk>

> diff --git a/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c b/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c
> index 7b6a823..0e7c3f1 100644
> --- a/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c
> +++ b/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c
> @@ -783,11 +783,13 @@ static unsigned int azx_rirb_get_response(struct hda_bus *bus,
>  {
>  	struct azx *chip = bus->private_data;
>  	unsigned long timeout;
> +	unsigned long loopcounter;
>  	int do_poll = 0;
>  
>   again:
>  	timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(1000);
> -	for (;;) {
> +	
> +	for (loopcounter = 0;; loopcounter++) {
>  		if (chip->polling_mode || do_poll) {
>  			spin_lock_irq(&chip->reg_lock);
>  			azx_update_rirb(chip);
> @@ -803,7 +805,7 @@ static unsigned int azx_rirb_get_response(struct hda_bus *bus,
>  		}
>  		if (time_after(jiffies, timeout))
>  			break;
> -		if (bus->needs_damn_long_delay)
> +		if (bus->needs_damn_long_delay || loopcounter > 3000)
>  			msleep(2); /* temporary workaround */
>  		else {
>  			udelay(10);

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-05-08 20:06 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-05-04  9:05 [PATCH] ALSA: HDA: Lessen CPU usage when waiting for chip to respond David Henningsson
2012-05-08 10:53 ` Takashi Iwai
2012-05-08 20:05 ` Arun Raghavan [this message]
2012-05-09 10:51   ` Takashi Iwai
2012-05-09 10:55     ` Arun Raghavan

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=1336507552.5353.3.camel@localhost \
    --to=arun.raghavan@collabora.co.uk \
    --cc=alsa-devel@alsa-project.org \
    --cc=david.henningsson@canonical.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).