From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>,
Bastian Hecht <hechtb@googlemail.com>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
Huang Shijie <b32955@freescale.com>, Lei Wen <leiwen@marvell.com>
Cc: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
dwmw2@infradead.org, kevin.wells@nxp.com, srinivas.bakki@nxp.com,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MTD: LPC32xx SLC NAND driver
Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 10:55:43 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1337068543.2528.143.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1336829386-23301-1-git-send-email-stigge@antcom.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1995 bytes --]
I am CCing few other guys who take care of several drivers which use
similar way of busy-waiting - probably you could change it?
Bastian: drivers/mtd/nand/sh_flctl.c
Lars-Peter: drivers/mtd/nand/jz4740_nand.c
Huang: drivers/mtd/nand/gpmi-nand/gpmi-lib.c
Lei Wen: drivers/mtd/nand/pxa3xx_nand.c
On Sat, 2012-05-12 at 15:29 +0200, Roland Stigge wrote:
> + /*
> + * The DMA is finished, but the NAND controller may still have
> + * buffered data. Wait until all the data is sent.
> + */
> + timeout = LPC32XX_DMA_SIMPLE_TIMEOUT;
> + while ((readl(SLC_STAT(host->io_base)) & SLCSTAT_DMA_FIFO)
> + && (timeout > 0))
> + timeout--;
> + if (!timeout) {
> + dev_err(mtd->dev.parent, "FIFO held data too long\n");
> + status = -EIO;
> + }
I know the MTD tree is full of this, but this is bad, I think. The
timeout should be time-backed, not CPU-cycles-backed.
I do not know the best way to do this, hopefully someone in the arm list
could suggest, but the following pattern is at least better:
/* Chip reaction time timeout in milliseconds */
#define LPC32XX_DMA_TIMEOUT 100
timeout = loops_per_jiffy * msecs_to_jiffies(LPC32XX_DMA_TIMEOUT);
while ((readl(...)) && timeout-- > 0)
cpu_relax();
if (!timeout)
error;
So basically I turned your hard-coded iterations count into a time-based
timeout. I also used cpu_relax() which is commonly used in tight-loops
like this. Here is a piece of documentation about cpu_relax():
"
The right way to perform a busy wait is:
while (my_variable != what_i_want)
cpu_relax();
The cpu_relax() call can lower CPU power consumption or yield to a
hyperthreaded twin processor; it also happens to serve as a compiler
barrier, so, once again, volatile is unnecessary. Of course, busy-
waiting is generally an anti-social act to begin with.
"
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-15 7:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-12 13:29 [PATCH] MTD: LPC32xx SLC NAND driver Roland Stigge
2012-05-15 7:55 ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
2012-05-15 8:15 ` Huang Shijie
2012-05-15 13:20 ` Roland Stigge
2012-05-15 13:31 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-05-15 13:48 ` Roland Stigge
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=1337068543.2528.143.camel@sauron.fi.intel.com \
--to=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=b32955@freescale.com \
--cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
--cc=hechtb@googlemail.com \
--cc=kevin.wells@nxp.com \
--cc=lars@metafoo.de \
--cc=leiwen@marvell.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=srinivas.bakki@nxp.com \
--cc=stigge@antcom.de \
/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).