From: vinod.koul@intel.com (Vinod Koul)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] DMA: extend documentation to provide more API details
Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2013 16:11:32 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131007104132.GI2954@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1310071233340.20796@axis700.grange>
On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 12:45:33PM +0200, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Oct 2013, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > > Do you see any problems using, say, a threaded interrupt handler, apart
> > > > from possible performance issues? That seems to be pretty convenient.
> > > > Otherwise we should really mandate somewhere, that bottom half processing
> > > > should take place in a tasklet?
> > >
> > > The documentation has always stated that callbacks will be made from
> > > tasklet context. The problem with allowing different contexts from
> > > different drivers is taht spinlocking becomes problematical. Remember
> > > that we have _bh() variants which lock against tasklets but allow IRQs.
>
> Vinod, Dan, what do you think about the bottom half interrupt processing?
> Do we want to make the use of a tasklet compulsory or can we also allow
> other contexts?
I dont see any advantage of using threaded handler as compared to tasklet, As
Russell pointed out its going to make locking and common handling very
complicated to be invoked from different contexts. What will be benefit from
this?
--
~Vinod
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-07 10:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-05 17:36 [PATCH] DMA: extend documentation to provide more API details Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-05 19:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-10-05 21:00 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-05 23:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-10-06 5:20 ` Vinod Koul
2013-10-07 10:45 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-07 10:41 ` Vinod Koul [this message]
2013-10-07 12:17 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-07 11:17 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-10-07 10:39 ` Vinod Koul
2013-10-07 12:15 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-07 14:25 ` Vinod Koul
2013-10-07 15:28 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-07 14:43 ` Vinod Koul
2013-10-07 15:45 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-07 15:52 ` Vinod Koul
2013-10-07 20:55 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-08 3:52 ` Vinod Koul
2013-10-08 7:28 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-07 15:48 ` Vinod Koul
2013-10-07 20:43 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-08 3:58 ` Vinod Koul
2013-10-08 7:17 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-09 1:34 ` Dan Williams
2013-10-10 16:15 ` Vinod Koul
2013-10-16 19:33 ` Stephen Warren
2013-10-17 5:16 ` Vinod Koul
2013-10-17 14:55 ` Stephen Warren
2013-10-17 17:00 ` Dan Williams
2013-10-07 7:40 ` Guennadi Liakhovetski
2013-10-09 1:28 ` Dan Williams
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=20131007104132.GI2954@intel.com \
--to=vinod.koul@intel.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).