From: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
To: <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
Harvey Hunt <harvey.hunt@imgtec.com>,
Alex Smith <alex.smith@imgtec.com>,
Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@axis.com>,
Alex Smith <alex@alex-smith.me.uk>
Subject: [PATCH] mtd: nand: check status before reporting timeout
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2016 17:19:23 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1457140763-67571-1-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com> (raw)
In commit b70af9bef49b ("mtd: nand: increase ready wait timeout and
report timeouts"), we increased the likelihood of scheduling during
nand_wait(). This makes us more likely to hit the time_before(...)
condition, since a lot of time may pass before we get scheduled again.
Now, the loop was already buggy, since we don't check if the NAND is
ready after exiting the loop; we simply print out a timeout warning. Fix
this by doing a final status check before printing a timeout message.
This isn't actually a critical bug, since the only effect is a false
warning print. But too many prints never hurt anyone, did they? :)
Side note: perhaps I'm not smart enough, but I'm not sure what the best
policy is for this kind of loop; do we busy loop (i.e., no
cond_resched()) to keep the lowest I/O latency (it's not great if the
resched is delaying Richard's system ~400ms)? Or do we allow
rescheduling, to play nice with the rest of the system (since some
operations can take quite a while)?
Reported-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
Reviewed-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>
Reviewed-by: Harvey Hunt <harvey.hunt@imgtec.com>
---
drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
index f2c8ff398d6c..596a9b0503da 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
@@ -566,8 +566,8 @@ void nand_wait_ready(struct mtd_info *mtd)
cond_resched();
} while (time_before(jiffies, timeo));
- pr_warn_ratelimited(
- "timeout while waiting for chip to become ready\n");
+ if (!chip->dev_ready(mtd))
+ pr_warn_ratelimited("timeout while waiting for chip to become ready\n");
out:
led_trigger_event(nand_led_trigger, LED_OFF);
}
--
2.7.0.rc3.207.g0ac5344
next reply other threads:[~2016-03-05 1:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-05 1:19 Brian Norris [this message]
2016-03-07 21:51 ` [PATCH] mtd: nand: check status before reporting timeout Brian Norris
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=1457140763-67571-1-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--to=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=alex.smith@imgtec.com \
--cc=alex@alex-smith.me.uk \
--cc=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--cc=harvey.hunt@imgtec.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=niklas.cassel@axis.com \
--cc=richard@nod.at \
/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