[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160826141223.445ed1db@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 14:12:23 +0100
From: One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Peter Hurley <peter@...leysoftware.com>,
NeilBrown <neil@...wn.name>,
"Dr . H . Nikolaus Schaller" <hns@...delico.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"open list:BLUETOOTH DRIVERS" <linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-serial@...r.kernel.org" <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] UART slave device bus
> Either we'd have to call tty_port->rx a character at a time or
> implement some temporary buffer. I don't think we want to call things
> like BT receive code a byte at a time. This needs to be a layer
> higher. flush_to_ldisc either needs to be duplicated to handle
> tty_port->rx or generalized to call either tty_port->rx or ldisc
> receive_buf. I'm not sure what to do about ldisc ref counting in the
> latter case.
You already have the buffer
What I was trying to suggest was that instead of
chars->buffer
flush
workqueue
loop pushing data into the ldisc
You can also do
chars->buffer
flush
workqueue
->rx() [where flush_to_ldisc is just one implementation of ->rx]
For byte by byte ports it really makes no difference (except you would be
able to do processing without an ldisc), but for DMA devices it would
give us a faster path for processing since the DMA completion event can
simply fire a buffer a characters directly at the protocol handler where
there are not latency concerns (ie it starts the new DMA and directly
involves ->rx())
Alan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists