linux-kernel - Re: Dmaengine query

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <v2he9c3a7c21004141730vcc79dd58t5478c9d83af9816@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 14 Apr 2010 17:30:39 -0700
From:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
To:	rd bairva <rbairva@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.arm.linux.org.uk,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Dmaengine query

On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 11:26 PM, rd bairva <rbairva@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
>        I am currently writing dmaengine compatible DMA driver for our ARM
> based architecture, But I am facing some performance issues doing
> that.
>
> 1. dmaengine says callback should run in tasklet, and next transfer
> cannot be scheduled from the callback.
>
> Due to these restrictions I am getting some performance issue while
> playing sound in our architecture.
>
>
> Can callback call in DMA driver be placed out of spin_lock to submit
> new operations from callback? (only in asynchronous case)
>
> is this Ok? please comment.

Other dma driver authors are dropping the lock across the call to the
callback in the mem-to-io case.  The compliance points in the
documentation are primarily targeted at the expectations of the
async_tx api.  In the mem-to-io (slave dma) model you are not using
the async_tx api.

--
Dan
--
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/