public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
	Addy Ke <addy.ke@rock-chips.com>,
	Max Schwarz <max.schwarz@online.de>,
	Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: rk3x: Increase wait timeout to 1 second
Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 10:33:12 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150504083312.GN25193@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1430430247-9632-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org>

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 02:44:07PM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
> While it's not sensible for an i2c command to _actually_ need more
> than 200ms to complete, let's increase the timeout anyway.  Why?  It
> turns out that if you've got a large number of printks going out to a
> serial console, interrupts on a CPU can be disabled for hundreds of
> milliseconds. That's not a great situation to be in to start with
> (maybe we should put a cap in vprintk_emit()) but it's pretty annoying
> to start seeing unexplained i2c timeouts.
> 
> A normal system shouldn't see i2c timeouts anyway, so increasing the
> timeout should help people debugging without hurting other people
> excessively.
Hmm, correct me if I'm wrong: You say that the following can happen:

	rk3x_i2c_xfer calls wait_event_timeout and blocks
	schedule ... disable_irqs ... xfer complete ... do some work ... enable_irqs
	control back to i2c driver after timeout elapsed
	wait_event_timeout returned 0

The documentation of wait_event_timeout tells:

 * Returns:
 * 0 if the @condition evaluated to %false after the @timeout elapsed,
 * 1 if the @condition evaluated to %true after the @timeout elapsed,
 * or the remaining jiffies (at least 1) if the @condition evaluated
 * to %true before the @timeout elapsed.

Where is the misunderstanding?

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-05-04  8:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-30 21:44 [PATCH] i2c: rk3x: Increase wait timeout to 1 second Doug Anderson
2015-05-01  3:40 ` Caesar Wang
2015-05-01  3:42 ` Caesar Wang
2015-05-04  8:33 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2015-05-04 15:11   ` Doug Anderson
2015-05-04 15:24     ` Uwe Kleine-König
2015-05-04 16:38       ` Doug Anderson
2015-05-05 13:10         ` Uwe Kleine-König

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=20150504083312.GN25193@pengutronix.de \
    --to=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=addy.ke@rock-chips.com \
    --cc=dianders@chromium.org \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
    --cc=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=max.schwarz@online.de \
    --cc=wsa@the-dreams.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