mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: schedule (wait_event) vs. while
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 2010 10:52:09 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b170af451002270152u228a46abr3b316da75b2fa3f0@mail.gmail.com> (raw)

In radeon engine reclocking code I need to do some calculations and
then wait for VBLANK interrupt. Right after VBLANK interrupt will
happen I need to reclock ASAP.

Interrupts are received by another context and I need some quite fast
synchronization.

1) Schedule solution:
reclocking() {
  calculations();
  radeon->vblank_sync = 0;
  wait_event_timeout(radeon->wq, radeon->vblank_sync, timeout);
  reclock();
}
i-handler() { radeon->vblank_sync = 1; }

2) While solution:
reclocking() {
  calculations();
  del_timer(radeon->fake_vblank);
  radeon->vblank_sync = 0;
  mod_timer(radeon->fake_vblank, 10ms);
  while(!radeon->vblank_sync);
  reclock();
}
i-handler() { radeon->vblank_sync = 1; }
fake-handler() { radeon->vblank_sync = 1; }

Of course first one is much cleaner but internally wait_event_timeout
uses schedule_timeout(). Now according to LDD3:
> Once a process releases the processor with schedule, there are no guarantees that the process will get the processor back anytime soon. Therefore, calling schedule in this manner is not a safe solution to the driver’s needs, in addition to being bad for the computing system as a whole. If you test jitsched while running load50, you can see that the delay associated to each line is extended by a few seconds, because other processes are using the CPU when the timeout expires.

I can not afford any delays because VBLANK is so short timeframe. Is
there any better solution?

-- 
Rafał

             reply	other threads:[~2010-02-27  9:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-02-27  9:52 Rafał Miłecki [this message]
2010-02-27 20:11 ` Roland Dreier

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=b170af451002270152u228a46abr3b316da75b2fa3f0@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=zajec5@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®