From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Timur Tabi <timur@freescale.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rdreier@cisco.com,
jirislaby@gmail.com, peterz@infradead.org, will.newton@gmail.com,
hancockrwd@gmail.com, jeremy@goop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] introduce macro spin_event_timeout()
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:01:51 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1236729711.7086.28.camel@pasglop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090310153537.5fd5d84d@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
On Tue, 2009-03-10 at 15:35 +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > This primary purpose of this macro is to poll on a hardware register until a
> > status bit changes. The timeout ensures that the loop still terminates if the
> > bit doesn't change as expected. This macro makes it easier for driver
> > developers to perform this kind of operation properly.
>
> NAK this - on a lot of platforms 1uS is the wrong timescale. Also we
> shouldn't be encouraging this kind of polling by making it very easy to
> write.
>
> It might be a useful internal macro for some freescale drivers but if so
> it doesn't belong in the core headers
I don't totally agree with your reasoning here Alan.
A simple fact of life is that drivers -will- do that sort spinning. They
don't always have a choice. Now do we want all drivers to do it
differently and get it wrong (such as not having timeouts etc...) or do
we provide a helper that has the added advantage of allowing us a lot
more easily to audit them ?
Hell, we can even make the helper warn if called with a too high timeout
value or that sort of thing...
I think it's all benefit to move that sort of cruft to a generic helper
like that in the long run.
Cheers,
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-11 0:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-10 15:30 [PATCH v4] introduce macro spin_event_timeout() Timur Tabi
2009-03-10 15:35 ` Alan Cox
2009-03-10 15:50 ` Timur Tabi
2009-03-10 16:05 ` Will Newton
2009-03-10 16:11 ` Timur Tabi
2009-03-11 0:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2009-03-11 0:37 ` Alan Cox
2009-03-11 16:48 ` Timur Tabi
2009-03-11 16:58 ` Alan Cox
2009-03-11 18:18 ` Timur Tabi
2009-03-11 21:58 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-03-12 2:45 ` Grant Likely
2009-03-12 15:54 ` Timur Tabi
2009-03-12 16:01 ` Grant Likely
2009-03-12 16:19 ` Timur Tabi
2009-03-12 16:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-12 19:05 ` Timur Tabi
2009-03-13 3:03 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-03-13 4:51 ` Grant Likely
2009-03-10 18:41 ` Grant Likely
2009-03-10 19:04 ` Timur Tabi
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=1236729711.7086.28.camel@pasglop \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=hancockrwd@gmail.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=jirislaby@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rdreier@cisco.com \
--cc=timur@freescale.com \
--cc=will.newton@gmail.com \
/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