DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=dE56LYMAIzk2wXeIQPQEyp6pcom2419QwrgEmV8ioBjYj6RFikMReqY+mtDsZP2QMHjGyubvulTS/x2PqQ1kJ6iw3su+SoWKmS84DfE5DFQ++Ro5sPRkX0R4oAryQi0Ta3V6JZjp65Bm+wB7hj6n8HZdgVs3nLQiuSaJWRvtC6Y=
Message-ID: <82faac5b0608071753q71050d72uadcf55bc1e54f30e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2006 10:53:40 +1000
From: "Darren Jenkins" <darrenrjenkins@gmail.com>
To: "Pavel Machek" <pavel@suse.cz>
Subject: Re: [KJ] [patch] fix common mistake in polling loops
Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, "Zed 0xff" <zed.0xff@gmail.com>,
       kernel-janitors@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <20060807233453.GK2759@elf.ucw.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <710c0ee0607280128g2d968c49ycff3bac9e073e7fa@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20060805114052.GE4506@ucw.cz> <20060805114547.GA5386@ucw.cz>
	 <82faac5b0608061639v315c6fa9l17cd4bf44b6bbc51@mail.gmail.com>
	 <20060807233453.GK2759@elf.ucw.cz>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 2032
Lines: 60

G'day

On 8/8/06, Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > >> Well, whoever wrote thi has some serious problems (in attitude
> > >> department). *Any* loop you design may take half a minute under
> > >> streange circumstances.
> >
> > 6.
> > common mistake in polling loops [from Linus]:
>
> Yes, Linus was wrong here. Or more precisely, he's right original code
> is broken, but his suggested "fix" is worse than the original.
>
>         unsigned long timeout = jiffies + HZ/2;
>         for (;;) {
>                 if (ready())
>                         return 0;
> [IMAGINE HALF A SECOND DELAY HERE]
>                 if (time_after(timeout, jiffies))
>                         break;
>                 msleep(10);
>         }
>
> Oops.
>
> > >Actually it may be broken, depending on use. In some cases this loop
> > >may want to poll the hardware 50 times, 10msec appart... and your loop
> > >can poll it only once in extreme conditions.
> > >
> > >Actually your loop is totally broken, and may poll only once (without
> > >any delay) and then directly timeout :-P -- that will break _any_
> > >user.
> >
> > The Idea is that we are checking some event in external hardware that
> > we know will complete in a given time (This time is not dependant on
> > system activity but is fixed). After that time if the event has not
> > happened we know something has borked.
>
> But you have to make sure YOU CHECK READY AFTER THE TIMEOUT. Linus'
> code does not do that.
>                                                                 Pavel


Sorry I did not realise that was your problem with the code.
Would it help if we just explicitly added a

if (ready())
        return 0;

after the loop, in the example code? so people wont miss adding
something like that in?

Darren J.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/