[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2010 11:04:39 +0100
From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To: Tomoya MORINAGA <tomoya-linux@....okisemi.com>
CC: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>,
Christian Pellegrin <chripell@...e.org>,
Barry Song <21cnbao@...il.com>,
Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
socketcan-core@...ts.berlios.de, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
andrew.chih.howe.khor@...el.com, qi.wang@...el.com,
margie.foster@...el.com, yong.y.wang@...el.com,
Masayuki Ohtake <masa-korg@....okisemi.com>,
kok.howg.ewe@...el.com, joel.clark@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6 v2] can: Topcliff: PCH_CAN driver: Fix build
warnings
On 11/11/2010 10:56 AM, Tomoya MORINAGA wrote:
>>>>> + if (priv->tx_obj == (PCH_OBJ_NUM + 1)) { /* Point tail Obj + 1 */
>>>>> + while (ioread32(&priv->regs->treq2) & 0xfc00)
>>>>> + udelay(1);
>>>
>>> When points tail of Tx message object,
>>> this driver waits until completion of all tx messaeg objects.
>>
>> Looping busy it not an option here.
>>
>>> Thus, application/driver ought not to be able to put Tx object exceed the number of tx message object.
>>> Thus I think these code(netif_stop_queue/netif_wake_queue) are completely redundant.
>>
>> Nope - please remove the waiting completely and convert your flow
>> control to netif_stop_queue/netif_wake_queue.
>>
>
> I see.
> I will remove like above.
>
> BTW, Let me know the reason.
> Could you explain the reason why you deny looping busy loop ?
That would kill performance.
cheers, Marc
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde |
Industrial Linux Solutions | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 |
Vertretung West/Dortmund | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | http://www.pengutronix.de |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (263 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists