[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160225231432.GN21465@google.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 15:14:32 -0800
From: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>
To: Richard Weinberger <richard.weinberger@...il.com>
Cc: Harvey Hunt <harvey.hunt@...tec.com>,
IMG-MIPSLinuxKerneldevelopers@...tec.com,
Alex Smith <alex.smith@...tec.com>,
Alex Smith <alex@...x-smith.me.uk>,
Zubair Lutfullah Kakakhel <Zubair.Kakakhel@...tec.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Niklas Cassel <niklas.cassel@...s.com>,
"linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] mtd: nand: increase ready wait timeout and report
timeouts
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:54:25PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 3:52 PM, Harvey Hunt <harvey.hunt@...tec.com> wrote:
> > From: Alex Smith <alex.smith@...tec.com>
[...]
> > --- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
> > @@ -543,23 +543,32 @@ static void panic_nand_wait_ready(struct mtd_info *mtd, unsigned long timeo)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > -/* Wait for the ready pin, after a command. The timeout is caught later. */
> > +/**
> > + * nand_wait_ready - [GENERIC] Wait for the ready pin after commands.
> > + * @mtd: MTD device structure
> > + *
> > + * Wait for the ready pin after a command, and warn if a timeout occurs.
> > + */
> > void nand_wait_ready(struct mtd_info *mtd)
> > {
> > struct nand_chip *chip = mtd->priv;
> > - unsigned long timeo = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(20);
> > + unsigned long timeo = 400;
> >
> > - /* 400ms timeout */
> > if (in_interrupt() || oops_in_progress)
> > - return panic_nand_wait_ready(mtd, 400);
> > + return panic_nand_wait_ready(mtd, timeo);
> >
> > led_trigger_event(nand_led_trigger, LED_FULL);
> > /* Wait until command is processed or timeout occurs */
> > + timeo = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(timeo);
> > do {
> > if (chip->dev_ready(mtd))
> > - break;
> > - touch_softlockup_watchdog();
> > + goto out;
> > + cond_resched();
> > } while (time_before(jiffies, timeo));
> > +
> > + pr_warn_ratelimited(
> > + "timeout while waiting for chip to become ready\n");
> > +out:
>
> Sorry for exhuming an already merged patch but Boris and I ran into
> spurious chip timeouts
> and hunted the issue down to this change.
> If the system is under heavy load the cond_resched() will swap in
> other threads and the
> time_before() calculation will trigger and a wrong chip timeout is reported.
>
> It is also not clear to us why the cond_resched() is needed at all.
> Can you please elaborate?
I can't speak for the "why" precisely. It seemed reasonable to avoid a
(potentially) 400 ms busy loop though, in the presence of other
potential work.
Regardless, this timeout loop is wrong. Shouldn't it have something like
the following?
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
index f2c8ff398d6c..596a9b0503da 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/nand/nand_base.c
@@ -566,8 +566,8 @@ void nand_wait_ready(struct mtd_info *mtd)
cond_resched();
} while (time_before(jiffies, timeo));
- pr_warn_ratelimited(
- "timeout while waiting for chip to become ready\n");
+ if (!chip->dev_ready(mtd))
+ pr_warn_ratelimited("timeout while waiting for chip to become ready\n");
out:
led_trigger_event(nand_led_trigger, LED_OFF);
}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists