From: Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@gmail.com>
To: "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>,
Michael Straube <straube.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
Phillip Potter <phil@philpotter.co.uk>,
"open list:STAGING SUBSYSTEM" <linux-staging@lists.linux.dev>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: staging: r8188eu: how to handle nested mutex under spinlock
Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2022 16:02:16 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7d3d23c3-1839-3e6a-27bf-85bad384e5e4@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2029549.KlZ2vcFHjT@leap>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1807 bytes --]
Hi Fabio,
On 4/3/22 15:55, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> On domenica 3 aprile 2022 14:45:49 CEST Pavel Skripkin wrote:
>> Hi Fabio,
>>
>> On 4/3/22 15:37, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_pwrctrl.c:379
>> >> >
>> >> > if (pwrpriv->ps_processing) {
>> >> > while (pwrpriv->ps_processing && rtw_get_passing_time_ms(start) <= 3000)
>> >> > msleep(10);
>> >> > }
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Hm, just wondering, shouldn't we annotate load from
>> >> pwrpriv->ps_processing with READ_ONCE() inside while loop?
>> >> IIUC compiler might want to cache first load into register and we will
>> >> stuck here forever.
>> >
>> > You're right. This can be cached. In situations like these one should use
>> > barriers or other API that use barriers implicitly (completions, for example).
>> >
>>
>> Not sure about completions, since they may sleep.
>
> No completions in this special context. They for _sure_ might sleep. I was
> talking about general cases when you are in a loop and wait for status change.
>
>>
>> Also, don't think that barriers are needed here, since this code just
>> waiting for observing value 1. Might be barrier will slightly speed up
>> waiting thread, but will also slow down other thread
>
> Here, I cannot help with a 100% good answer. Maybe Greg wants to say something
> about it?
>
IMO, the best answer is just remove this loop, since it does nothing. Or
redesign it to be more sane
It waits for ps_processing to become 0 for 3000 ms, but if 3000 ms
expires... execution goes forward like as ps_processing was 0 from the
beginning
Maybe it's something hw related, like wait for 3000 ms and all will be
ok. Can't say...
With regards,
Pavel Skripkin
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 840 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-03 13:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-02 20:47 staging: r8188eu: how to handle nested mutex under spinlock Michael Straube
2022-04-02 21:13 ` Pavel Skripkin
2022-04-02 21:32 ` Larry Finger
2022-04-03 8:44 ` Michael Straube
[not found] ` <4389354.LvFx2qVVIh@leap>
[not found] ` <1813843.tdWV9SEqCh@leap>
2022-04-03 11:08 ` Michael Straube
[not found] ` <7365301.EvYhyI6sBW@leap>
2022-04-03 11:41 ` Michael Straube
2022-04-03 11:48 ` Pavel Skripkin
[not found] ` <1817830.CQOukoFCf9@leap>
2022-04-03 12:14 ` Michael Straube
2022-04-03 12:19 ` Pavel Skripkin
[not found] ` <4412825.cEBGB3zze1@leap>
2022-04-03 12:45 ` Pavel Skripkin
[not found] ` <2029549.KlZ2vcFHjT@leap>
2022-04-03 13:02 ` Pavel Skripkin [this message]
2022-04-03 20:51 ` Michael Straube
2022-04-03 21:15 ` Pavel Skripkin
2022-04-04 8:50 ` David Laight
2022-04-04 16:38 ` Pavel Skripkin
2022-04-04 16:59 ` David Laight
2022-04-04 17:12 ` Pavel Skripkin
[not found] ` <1858641.taCxCBeP46@leap>
[not found] ` <2366209.jE0xQCEvom@leap>
2022-04-03 12:18 ` Michael Straube
2022-04-04 13:33 ` Dan Carpenter
2022-04-04 14:16 ` Michael Straube
[not found] ` <3097543.5fSG56mABF@leap>
2022-04-03 11:44 ` Michael Straube
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=7d3d23c3-1839-3e6a-27bf-85bad384e5e4@gmail.com \
--to=paskripkin@gmail.com \
--cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
--cc=fmdefrancesco@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=phil@philpotter.co.uk \
--cc=straube.linux@gmail.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