From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Martin Sperl <kernel@martin.sperl.org>
Cc: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
linux-tegra <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-spi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Regression: spi: core: avoid waking pump thread from spi_sync instead run teardown delayed
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 21:25:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190115212539.GK5522@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5D3256B1-5DAE-4E3F-9099-5425F4BCA304@martin.sperl.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1301 bytes --]
On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 09:58:55PM +0100, Martin Sperl wrote:
> Maybe a bigger change to the reduce the complexity of
> the state machine would solve that problem and also
> reduce code complexity...
Yeah, that's where I was getting to with that test patch I posted.
> I may find some time over the weekend if no solution
> has been found until then.
Thanks for volunteering :)
> The way I would envision it it would have a “state”
> as a level (0=shutdown, 1=hw enabled, 2=in pump,
> 3=in transfer, 4=in hw-mode,...) and a complete
> to allow waking the shutdown thread (and by this
> avoiding the busy wait loop we have now).
> This would replace those idling, busy, and running flags.
That's a good idea, yes - a single enum much more reflects what we can
actually do in terms of transitions.
> Drawback: it is invasive, but let us see what it
> really looks like...
I think we need to either drop your change (which would be bad since it
is a big performance improvement, I'd punted it for later when I did the
original refactoring to push the work into the caller threads then never
got around to it) or have a invasive changes to make the new situation
clearer. Right now things are just far too complex to reason about
which isn't helping anyone.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-15 21:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-14 15:35 Regression: spi: core: avoid waking pump thread from spi_sync instead run teardown delayed Jon Hunter
[not found] ` <7C4A5EFC-8235-40C8-96E1-E6020529DF72@martin.sperl.org>
2019-01-15 14:26 ` Jon Hunter
2019-01-15 15:10 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-15 16:09 ` Jon Hunter
2019-01-15 19:27 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-15 17:39 ` kernel
2019-01-15 19:26 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-15 20:58 ` Martin Sperl
2019-01-15 21:25 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2019-01-16 11:01 ` Jon Hunter
2019-01-18 17:11 ` kernel
2019-01-18 19:12 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-20 11:24 ` kernel
2019-01-23 17:56 ` Mark Brown
2019-05-09 19:47 ` Martin Sperl
2019-05-12 8:54 ` Mark Brown
2019-01-16 10:58 ` Jon Hunter
2019-01-22 9:36 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-01-23 8:26 ` Marek Szyprowski
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=20190115212539.GK5522@sirena.org.uk \
--to=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=jonathanh@nvidia.com \
--cc=kernel@martin.sperl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
/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