From: Tobias Waldekranz <tobias@waldekranz.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Improve performance of busy bit polling
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 13:58:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o83xbajf.fsf@waldekranz.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YfHdCDIUvpaYpDSF@lunn.ch>
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 00:45, Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> wrote:
> There are a few bit-banging systems out there. For those, i wonder if
> 50ms is too short? With the old code, they had 16 chances, no matter
> how slow they were. With the new code, if they take 50ms for one
> transaction, they don't get a second chance.
>
> But if they have taken 50ms, around 37ms has been spent with the
> preamble, start, op, phy address, and register address. I assume at
> that point the switch actually looks at the register, and given your
> timings, it really should be ready, so a second loop is probably not
> required?
>
> O.K, so this seems safe.
I think you raise a good point though. Say that you then have this
series of events:
1. Bang out ST
2. Bang out OP
3. Bang out PHYADR
4. Bang out REGADR
5. Clock out TA
6. schedule()
7. A SCHED_FIFO/P99 task runs
8. Clock in DATA
- Steps 1 through 5 could plausibly be completed before the bit clears
if you are running over some memory mapped GPIO lines
- Step 7 could execute for more than 50ms
- After step 8, you would see the busy bit set, but your time is up
All of this is of course _very_ unlikely, but not impossible. Should we
ensure that you always get at least two bites at the apple?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-27 12:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-26 23:12 [PATCH net-next 0/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Improve indirect addressing performance Tobias Waldekranz
2022-01-26 23:12 ` [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Improve performance of busy bit polling Tobias Waldekranz
2022-01-26 23:45 ` Andrew Lunn
2022-01-27 12:58 ` Tobias Waldekranz [this message]
2022-01-27 13:06 ` Andrew Lunn
2022-01-26 23:54 ` Andrew Lunn
2022-01-26 23:12 ` [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: Improve indirect addressing performance Tobias Waldekranz
2022-01-26 23:53 ` Andrew Lunn
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=87o83xbajf.fsf@waldekranz.com \
--to=tobias@waldekranz.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olteanv@gmail.com \
--cc=vivien.didelot@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).