From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arun Raghavan Subject: Re: [PATCH] ALSA: HDA: Lessen CPU usage when waiting for chip to respond Date: Wed, 09 May 2012 16:25:43 +0530 Message-ID: <1336560943.7277.0.camel@localhost> References: <1336122355-6017-1-git-send-email-david.henningsson@canonical.com> <1336507552.5353.3.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bhuna.collabora.co.uk (bhuna.collabora.co.uk [93.93.135.160]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B51810466A for ; Wed, 9 May 2012 14:50:51 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: Takashi Iwai Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, David Henningsson List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Wed, 2012-05-09 at 12:51 +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > At Wed, 09 May 2012 01:35:52 +0530, > Arun Raghavan wrote: > > > > 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 > > > --- > > > 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 > > I guess you meant tested-by tag? > In anyway I took the patch now with Cc to stable. It'll be included > in the next pull request to Linus. I did, and now I know what tag to use the next time. :) Thanks, Arun