From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Timur Tabi <timur@freescale.com>,
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, brueckner@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hvc_console: returning 0 from put_chars is not an error
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 13:57:45 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4AD770A9.6070509@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200910152041.26646.borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Christian Borntraeger wrote:
> Right. Looking at more drivers it seems that both ways (waiting and dropping)
> are used.
>
> Hmmm, if we are ok with having both options, we should let the hvc backend
> decide if it wants to drain or to discard.
I'd say the dropping approach is quite undesirable (significant
potential for output loss unless the buffer is huge), unless there's
simply no way to safely spin. Hopefully there are no such backends, but
if there are perhaps we can have them return some special code to
indicate that.
> If we just busy loop, it actually does not matter how we let hvc_console react
> on 0, as long as we adopt all backends to use that interface consistent.
>
> On the other hand, backends might want to do special magic on congestion so I
> personally tend to let the backend loop instead of hvc_console. But I am really
> not sure.
Doing it in the backend requires the backend to know whether it's being
called for printk or for user I/O. In the latter case, we don't want to
spin, but rather wait for an IRQ (or poll with a timer if there's no IRQ).
-Scott
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-15 18:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1255557226-4403-1-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com>
2009-10-15 11:05 ` [PATCH] hvc_console: returning 0 from put_chars is not an error Christian Borntraeger
2009-10-15 16:09 ` Scott Wood
2009-10-15 18:41 ` Christian Borntraeger
2009-10-15 18:55 ` Timur Tabi
2009-10-15 18:57 ` Scott Wood [this message]
2009-10-15 19:26 ` Christian Borntraeger
2009-10-15 19:32 ` Scott Wood
2009-10-16 8:49 ` Hendrik Brueckner
2009-10-17 23:17 ` Timur Tabi
2009-10-16 4:46 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2009-10-16 15:33 ` Scott Wood
2009-10-16 18:03 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
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=4AD770A9.6070509@freescale.com \
--to=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=brueckner@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=timur@freescale.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