From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: Darren Jenkins <darrenrjenkins@gmail.com>, torvalds@osdl.org
Cc: Zed 0xff <zed.0xff@gmail.com>,
kernel-janitors@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [KJ] [patch] fix common mistake in polling loops
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 01:34:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060807233453.GK2759@elf.ucw.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <82faac5b0608061639v315c6fa9l17cd4bf44b6bbc51@mail.gmail.com>
Hi!
> >> Well, whoever wrote thi has some serious problems (in attitude
> >> department). *Any* loop you design may take half a minute under
> >> streange circumstances.
>
> 6.
> common mistake in polling loops [from Linus]:
Yes, Linus was wrong here. Or more precisely, he's right original code
is broken, but his suggested "fix" is worse than the original.
unsigned long timeout = jiffies + HZ/2;
for (;;) {
if (ready())
return 0;
[IMAGINE HALF A SECOND DELAY HERE]
if (time_after(timeout, jiffies))
break;
msleep(10);
}
Oops.
> >Actually it may be broken, depending on use. In some cases this loop
> >may want to poll the hardware 50 times, 10msec appart... and your loop
> >can poll it only once in extreme conditions.
> >
> >Actually your loop is totally broken, and may poll only once (without
> >any delay) and then directly timeout :-P -- that will break _any_
> >user.
>
> The Idea is that we are checking some event in external hardware that
> we know will complete in a given time (This time is not dependant on
> system activity but is fixed). After that time if the event has not
> happened we know something has borked.
But you have to make sure YOU CHECK READY AFTER THE TIMEOUT. Linus'
code does not do that.
Pavel
--
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-07 23:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-07-28 8:28 [patch] fix common mistake in polling loops Zed 0xff
2006-07-28 8:51 ` Jeff Garzik
2006-07-28 12:43 ` Dmitry Torokhov
2006-08-05 11:40 ` Pavel Machek
2006-08-05 11:45 ` Pavel Machek
2006-08-06 23:39 ` [KJ] " Darren Jenkins
2006-08-07 23:34 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
2006-08-08 0:53 ` Darren Jenkins
2006-08-08 2:53 ` Om N.
2006-08-10 0:25 ` Andrew James Wade
2006-08-10 1:11 ` Darren Jenkins
2006-08-08 9:19 ` Pavel Machek
[not found] <6DvTu-6tk-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <6Ho72-7do-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <6HpZd-1vB-19@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <6I6B4-72S-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <6I7np-8bD-11@gated-at.bofh.it>
2006-08-10 11:58 ` Bodo Eggert
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=20060807233453.GK2759@elf.ucw.cz \
--to=pavel@suse.cz \
--cc=darrenrjenkins@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=zed.0xff@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