From: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>
To: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, timur@codeaurora.org,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>,
Christopher Covington <cov@codeaurora.org>,
dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: qcom_hidma: release the descriptor before the callback
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 22:53:10 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160810172310.GG9681@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2fce2512-853e-c8e6-05d5-4c9088ef7d83@metafoo.de>
On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 02:25:28PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> On 08/08/2016 11:08 AM, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 04, 2016 at 05:59:30PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote:
> >> On 08/04/2016 05:38 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>> What you instead need to do is to find some way to record in your
> >>> driver that transaction 2 failed, and when dma_cookie_status() says
> >>> that a transaction has DMA_COMPLETE status, you need to look up to
> >>> see whether it failed.
> >>
> >> In my opinion this is where the current API is broken by design. For each
> >> transfer that fails you need to store the cookie associated with that
> >> transfer in some kind of lookup table. Since there is no lifetime associated
> >> with a cookie entries in this table would need to be retained forever and it
> >> will grow unbound.
> >
> > And how many drivers can report errors? And how many drivers can guarantee
> > DMA_COMPLETE implies transaction was succesful.
>
> The former just a handful, the later hopefully all.
>
> >
> >> Ideally we'd mark error reporting through this interface as deprecated and
> >> discourage new users of the interface. As far as I can see most of the few
> >> drivers that do return DMA_ERROR get it wrong anyway, e.g. return it
> >> unconditionally for all cookies when an error occurred for any of them.
> >
> > Error reporting is quite tricky as detection is a problem. So yes if you
> > can do so, it is highly encouraged to report using new interface which is
> > better than client checking after callback.
> >
> > Btw what is the behaviour after error? I would think that client will see an
> > error and report to upper layer while initiaite closure of transaction. So
> > does driver need to keep the state for a longer time :-)
>
> The problem is that this is not really clearly defined.
>
> 1) What should be done when multiple descriptors are queued and an error is
> encountered on one of them. Should the descriptors that are after the one in
> the queue that caused the error be discarded or should they be executed as
> normal?
That is client's call.
But a reasonable way would be for client to propagate those errors up, so it
can terminate.
> 2) How long does a error result need to be retained. Can it be discarded
> when the terminate_all() is called, or can it be discarded when the next
> issue_pending() is called or should it be retained forever?
Uptill next terminate_all()
> Unless we can clearly define the semantics of error reporting it is very
> difficult for drivers to use it. Which is probably one of the reasons why
> there are only very few DMAengine consumers that do actual error checking.
Yes agreed, but most reasonable behaviour is to terminate. Also I would
expect the error reporting to be done thru new API and explcitly told that
we found error (if we can).
-
~Vinod
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-10 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-14 2:57 [PATCH] dmaengine: qcom_hidma: release the descriptor before the callback Sinan Kaya
2016-07-16 1:00 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-07-24 6:24 ` Vinod Koul
2016-07-25 14:19 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-08-04 12:55 ` Vinod Koul
2016-08-04 14:17 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-08-04 14:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-08-04 15:27 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-08-04 15:38 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-08-04 15:59 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2016-08-08 9:08 ` Vinod Koul
2016-08-08 12:25 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2016-08-10 17:23 ` Vinod Koul [this message]
2016-08-04 16:08 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-08-04 16:15 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2016-08-05 6:32 ` Robert Jarzmik
2016-08-05 8:34 ` Lars-Peter Clausen
2016-08-05 15:17 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-08-08 9:02 ` Vinod Koul
2016-08-08 14:45 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-08-10 17:28 ` Vinod Koul
2016-08-10 17:31 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-08-19 2:48 ` Vinod Koul
2016-08-19 3:26 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-08-19 3:42 ` Vinod Koul
2016-08-19 3:48 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-08-19 5:52 ` Vinod Koul
2016-08-19 11:13 ` okaya
2016-08-19 17:02 ` Vinod Koul
2016-08-19 17:21 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-08-22 6:08 ` Vinod Koul
2016-08-22 13:27 ` Sinan Kaya
2016-08-22 17:00 ` Vinod Koul
2016-08-08 8:51 ` Vinod Koul
2016-08-08 12:10 ` okaya
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=20160810172310.GG9681@localhost \
--to=vinod.koul@intel.com \
--cc=cov@codeaurora.org \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=okaya@codeaurora.org \
--cc=timur@codeaurora.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).