Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.33 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.33;
Date:   Tue, 26 Sep 2023 08:16:33 +0100
From:   Sean Young <sean@mess.org>
To:     Ivaylo Dimitrov <ivo.g.dimitrov.75@gmail.com>
Cc:     linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= 
        <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
        Timo Kokkonen <timo.t.kokkonen@iki.fi>,
        Pali =?iso-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= <pali.rohar@gmail.com>,
        "Sicelo A . Mhlongo" <absicsz@gmail.com>,
        linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] media: rc: remove ir-rx51 in favour of generic
 pwm-ir-tx
Message-ID: <ZRKFUb1vRtn82bgn@gofer.mess.org>
References: <cover.1693577725.git.sean@mess.org>
 <e5325e826935f0bd8566152b6a5fa799b2429d43.1693577725.git.sean@mess.org>
 <99f0042f-538c-bcaf-96fd-bac24a87f88e@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <99f0042f-538c-bcaf-96fd-bac24a87f88e@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Sep 25, 2023 at 07:06:44PM +0300, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote:
> On 1.09.23 г. 17:18 ч., Sean Young wrote:
> > The ir-rx51 is a pwm-based TX driver specific to the N900. This can be
> > handled entirely by the generic pwm-ir-tx driver, and in fact the
> > pwm-ir-tx driver has been compatible with ir-rx51 from the start.
> > 
> 
> Unfortunately, pwm-ir-tx does not work on n900. My investigation shows that
> for some reason usleep_range() sleeps for at least 300-400 us more than what
> interval it is requested to sleep. I played with cyclictest from rt-tests
> package and it gives similar results - increasing the priority helps, but I
> was not able to make it sleep for less that 300 us in average. I tried
> cpu_latency_qos_add_request() in pwm-ir-tx, but it made no difference.
> 
> I get similar results on motorola droid4 (OMAP4), albeit there average sleep
> is in 200-300 us range, which makes me believe that either OMAPs have issues
> with hrtimers or the config we use has some issue which leads to scheduler
> latency. Or, something else...

The pwm-ir-tx driver does suffer from this problem, but I was under the
impression that the ir-rx51 has the same problem.

> In either case help is appreciated to dig further trying to find the reason
> for such a big delay.

pwm-ir-tx uses usleep_range() and ir-rx51 uses hrtimers. I thought that
usleep_range() uses hrtimers; however if you're not seeing the same delay
on ir-rx51 then maybe it's time to switch pwm-ir-tx to hrtimers.

I don't have a n900 to test on, unfortunately.

Thanks
Sean