From: Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC&PATCH 1/2] PCI Error Recovery (readX_check)
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 17:06:13 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <412AF6F5.6020806@jp.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0408232231070.17766@ppc970.osdl.org>
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> I'd suggest changing the locking a bit.
>
> Just make "clear_pci_errors()" take a spinlock on the bridge, and
> "read_pci_errors()" unlock it. We need to make sure that if multiple
> devices on the same bridge try to be careful, they can do so without
> seeing each others errors.
... Why spinlock?
Are rwlocks not smart way to decrease the impact on I/O performance?
> I'd also suggest that you make "clear_pci_errors()" return a cookie for
> read_pci_errors() to use.
What I can only imagine is... passing somthing like a identifier of
looking bridge to driver as cookie, functionally, it's sounds good.
... Are there any other useful usages of the cookie?
> Also, I assume that the thing would support (and please make the
> documentation clear on it) multiple IO operations between a
> "clear_pci_errors()" and it's ending "read_pci_errors()" pair.
Sure.
So taking a spinlock between this pair clearly means long time locking on
I/O, this will block all other I/O under same bridge, I think this isn't
good situation. Still do we take a spinlock?
Thanks,
H.Seto
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-08-24 8:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-08-24 5:24 [RFC&PATCH 1/2] PCI Error Recovery (readX_check) Hidetoshi Seto
2004-08-24 5:41 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-24 8:06 ` Hidetoshi Seto [this message]
2004-08-25 7:01 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-08-25 7:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-25 15:52 ` Grant Grundler
2004-08-25 17:25 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-25 23:23 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-08-25 23:35 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-08-25 15:42 ` Grant Grundler
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-08-28 1:23 Hidetoshi Seto
2004-09-17 12:00 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-09-17 12:06 ` Hidetoshi Seto
2004-09-18 4:36 ` Grant Grundler
2004-09-21 8:32 ` Hidetoshi Seto
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=412AF6F5.6020806@jp.fujitsu.com \
--to=seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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