From: Alex Ivchenko <aivchenko@ueidaq.com>
To: root@chaos.analogic.com
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.4.6 possible problem
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2001 18:33:32 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3B54BD3C.A8E1E47F@ueidaq.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.1010717153319.6035A-100000@chaos.analogic.com>
Dick,
"Richard B. Johnson" wrote:
>
> On Tue, 17 Jul 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> > In article <Pine.LNX.3.95.1010717103652.1430A-100000@chaos.analogic.com>,
> > Richard B. Johnson <root@chaos.analogic.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > ticks = 1 * HZ; /* For 1 second */
> > > while((ticks = interruptible_sleep_on_timeout(&wqhead, ticks)) > 0)
> > > ;
> >
> > Don't do this.
> >
> > Imagine what happens if a signal comes in and wakes you up? The signal
> > will continue to be pending, which will make your "sleep loop" be a busy
> > loop as you can never go to sleep interruptibly with a pending signal.
Sleep like this is useless in real code. You either want your ioctl to unblock
when event (or time-out) happens or use sleep function to make driver wait certain
amount of time (if you need to access poorly-designed hardware).
Off-topic:
> I was going to compile a list of innovations that could be
> attributed to Microsoft. Once I realized that Ctrl-Alt-Del
> was handled in the BIOS, I found that there aren't any.
Well, give 'em at least some credit for copycating :-)
As a system architect I would say a *good* copycating.
For example:
Win32 events (CreateEvent(), WaitForxxxObject()) are very useful things.
The whole reason I was asking my questions is because I want to emulate Win32-like
event mechanism it Linux driver. I wouldn't mind to have this mechanism built into
Linux kernel.
Say, one of the user process threads calls:
ret = WaitForSingleObject(hObject, dwTimeoutms);
or
ret = WaitForMultipleObjects(nNumber, hObjects[], FALSE, dwTimeoutms);
and waits until time-out or one (or more) objects are set.
>From the driver side you call:
KeSetEvent(hNotifyEvent, (KPRIORITY)1, FALSE);
when you want to release object.
It's very useful.
For example, with our hardware I can have up to 16*4 = 64 totally separated
subsystems. Each subsystem can fire event asynchronously. It's much easier to
control each subsystem in separate thread and Win32 events are very handy.
--
Regards,
Alex
--
Alex Ivchenko, Ph.D.
United Electronic Industries, Inc.
"The High-Performance Alternative (tm)"
--
10 Dexter Avenue
Watertown, Massachusetts 02472
Tel: (617) 924-1155 x 222 Fax: (617) 924-1441
http://www.ueidaq.com
prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-07-17 22:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-07-17 14:01 2.4.6 possible problem Alex Ivchenko
2001-07-17 14:46 ` Richard B. Johnson
2001-07-17 18:44 ` Alex Ivchenko
2001-07-17 18:52 ` Richard B. Johnson
2001-07-17 19:24 ` Linus Torvalds
2001-07-17 19:36 ` Richard B. Johnson
2001-07-17 19:42 ` Richard B. Johnson
2001-07-17 22:33 ` Alex Ivchenko [this message]
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=3B54BD3C.A8E1E47F@ueidaq.com \
--to=aivchenko@ueidaq.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=root@chaos.analogic.com \
--cc=torvalds@transmeta.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