DMA Engine development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 16:35:46 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87y0x7z45p.fsf@AUSNATLYNCH.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r030ldbw.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:
>>> My understanding (and testing) is that wait_event_timeout() will block
>>> for the duration even in the face of interrupts, 'freezable' will not.
>>
>> They have different behaviors with respect to *signals* and the
>> wake_up() variant used, but not device interrupts.
>>
>
> Ah! That's something that I wasn't considering. That it could be
> something other than interrupts that were unblocking wait_event_*().

Well, I doubt it would be a signal in this case. Maybe you've
experienced timeouts?

>> 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.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-03-14 21:35 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 [this message]
2025-03-14 22:24               ` Vinicius Costa Gomes
2025-04-02 13:45                 ` Nathan Lynch
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=87y0x7z45p.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox