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  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]
Date:	Mon, 16 Jun 2014 17:09:15 +0800
From:	micky <>
To:	Ulf Hansson <>
CC:	Samuel Ortiz <>,
	Lee Jones <>,
	Chris Ball <>, <>,
	"" <>,
	linux-mmc <>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <>,
	Dan Carpenter <>,
	Roger <>, Wei WANG <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mmc: rtsx: add support for async request

On 06/16/2014 04:42 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> @@ -36,7 +37,10 @@ struct realtek_pci_sdmmc {
>> >         struct rtsx_pcr         *pcr;
>> >         struct mmc_host         *mmc;
>> >         struct mmc_request      *mrq;
>> >+       struct workqueue_struct *workq;
>> >+#define SDMMC_WORKQ_NAME       "rtsx_pci_sdmmc_workq"
>> >
>> >+       struct work_struct      work;
> I am trying to understand why you need a work/workqueue to implement
> this feature. Is that really the case?
> Could you elaborate on the reasons?
Hi Uffe,

we need return as fast as possible in mmc_host_ops request(ops->request) 
so the mmc core can continue handle next request.
when next request everything is ready, it will wait previous done(if not 
then call ops->request().

we can't use atomic context, because we use mutex_lock() to protect
resource, and we have to hold the lock during handle request.
So I use workq, we just queue a work and return in ops->request(),
The mmc core can continue without blocking at ops->request().

Best Regards.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists