[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c70ff3ad0708301143w55bf296p37b0991d7f099fd6@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 21:43:05 +0300
From: "saeed bishara" <saeed.bishara@...il.com>
To: "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-raid@...r.kernel.org,
neilb@...e.de, "Nelson, Shannon" <shannon.nelson@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [md-accel PATCH 16/19] dmaengine: driver for the iop32x, iop33x, and iop13xx raid engines
you are right, I've another question regarding the function
dma_wait_for_async_tx from async_tx.c, here is the body of the code:
/* poll through the dependency chain, return when tx is complete */
1. do {
2. iter = tx;
3. while (iter->cookie == -EBUSY)
4. iter = iter->parent;
5.
6. status = dma_sync_wait(iter->chan, iter->cookie);
7. } while (status == DMA_IN_PROGRESS || (iter != tx));
assume that:
- The interrupt capability is not provided.
- Request A was sent to chan 0
- Request B that depends on A is sent to chan 1
- Request C that depends on B is send to chan 2.
- Also, assume that when C is handled by async_tx_submit(), B is still
not queued to the dmaengine (cookie equals to -EBUSY).
In this case, dma_wait_for_async_tx will be called for C, now, it
looks for me that the do while will loop forever, even when A gets
completed. this is because the iter will point to B after line 4, thus
the iter != tx (C) will always become true.
saeed
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists