lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Nov]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH] PCI: imx6:don't sleep in atomic context
Date
On Tuesday 10 November 2015 10:35:10 Lucas Stach wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 10.11.2015, 10:28 +0100 schrieb Arnd Bergmann:
> > On Tuesday 10 November 2015 09:41:18 Lucas Stach wrote:
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/pci/host/pci-imx6.c
> > > > b/drivers/pci/host/pci-imx6.c index 233a196..9769b13 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/pci/host/pci-imx6.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/pci/host/pci-imx6.c
> > > > @@ -499,7 +499,7 @@ static int imx6_pcie_link_up(struct pcie_port *pp)
> > > > * Wait a little bit, then re-check if the link finished
> > > > * the training.
> > > > */
> > > > - usleep_range(1000, 2000);
> > > > + mdelay(1000);
> > >
> > > A mdelay(1000) is a whole different timescale than a usleep(1000).
> > > If this patch works for you with mdelay(1) or maybe mdelay(2) I
> > > would be fine with it.
> >
> > mdelay(1) is still a really long time to block the CPU for, on
> > potentially every config space access.
> >
> > Everybody else just returns the link status here, which seems to be
> > the better alternative. If you need to delay the startup, better
> > have a msleep(1) loop in the initial probe function where you are
> > allowed to sleep.
> >
> Yes, it's somewhere on my TODO list to rework the link-up handling
> here, but as there are quite a few timing and ordering implications in
> that code, this needs a good thought and a good deal of testing. So
> I'm inclined to ACK the current patch to get rid of the obvious bug
> and sort things out properly in a follow on patchset.

Maybe use that patch with some modifications then:

* add a comment to explain that this is currently called from possibly
atomic context through pci_config_{read,write} and that the link
state handling never belonged here.

* instead of looping five times for up to 2ms each, loop 100 times
around a udelay(20) to hopefully be done earlier. I was going to
suggest using time_before(timeout, jiffies) as the condition to
wait for, but that doesn't work if called with interrupts disabled.

Arnd
Shall I go ahead by changing only current patch to mdelay(1). I will also
Incorporate comment #1 given by Arnd above.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-11-16 11:01    [W:0.040 / U:3.360 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site