From: qiaozhou <qiaozhou@asrmicro.com> To: <tj@kernel.org>, <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, Wang Wilbur <wilburwang@asrmicro.com>, Wu Gang <gangwu@asrmicro.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org> Subject: [Question] about patch: don't use [delayed_]work_pending() Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 17:09:36 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <d2501c4c-8e7b-bea3-1b01-000b36b5dfe9@asrmicro.com> (raw) Hi Tejun, I have a question related with below patch, and need your suggestion. In our system, we do cpu clock init in of_clk_init path, and use pm qos to maintain cpu/cci clock. Firstly we init a CCI_CLK_QOS and set a default value, then update CCI_CLK_QOS to limit CCI min frequency according to current cpu frequency. Before calling pm_qos_update_request, irq is disabled, but after the calling, irq is enabled in cancel_delayed_work_sync, which causes some inconvenience before Before this patch is applied, it checks pending work and won't do cancel_delayed_work_sync in this boot up phase. The simple calling sequence is like this: start_kernel -> of_clk_init -> cpu_clk_init -> pm_qos_add_request(xx, default_value), then pm_qos_update_request. I don't know whether it's meaningful to still check pending work here, or it's not suggested to use pm_qos_update_request in this early boot up phase. Could you help to share some opinions? (I can fix this issue by adding the current qos value directly instead of default value, though.) Thanks a lot. commit ed1ac6e91a3ff7c561008ba57747cd6cbc49385e Author: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Date: Fri Jan 11 13:37:33 2013 +0100 PM: don't use [delayed_]work_pending() There's no need to test whether a (delayed) work item is pending before queueing, flushing or cancelling it, so remove work_pending() tests used in those cases. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> ... @@ -359,8 +359,7 @@ void pm_qos_update_request(struct pm_qos_request *req, return; } - if (delayed_work_pending(&req->work)) - cancel_delayed_work_sync(&req->work); + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&req->work); ... Best Regards Qiao
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: qiaozhou <qiaozhou@asrmicro.com> To: tj@kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Wang Wilbur <wilburwang@asrmicro.com>, Wu Gang <gangwu@asrmicro.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [Question] about patch: don't use [delayed_]work_pending() Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 17:09:36 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <d2501c4c-8e7b-bea3-1b01-000b36b5dfe9@asrmicro.com> (raw) Hi Tejun, I have a question related with below patch, and need your suggestion. In our system, we do cpu clock init in of_clk_init path, and use pm qos to maintain cpu/cci clock. Firstly we init a CCI_CLK_QOS and set a default value, then update CCI_CLK_QOS to limit CCI min frequency according to current cpu frequency. Before calling pm_qos_update_request, irq is disabled, but after the calling, irq is enabled in cancel_delayed_work_sync, which causes some inconvenience before Before this patch is applied, it checks pending work and won't do cancel_delayed_work_sync in this boot up phase. The simple calling sequence is like this: start_kernel -> of_clk_init -> cpu_clk_init -> pm_qos_add_request(xx, default_value), then pm_qos_update_request. I don't know whether it's meaningful to still check pending work here, or it's not suggested to use pm_qos_update_request in this early boot up phase. Could you help to share some opinions? (I can fix this issue by adding the current qos value directly instead of default value, though.) Thanks a lot. commit ed1ac6e91a3ff7c561008ba57747cd6cbc49385e Author: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Date: Fri Jan 11 13:37:33 2013 +0100 PM: don't use [delayed_]work_pending() There's no need to test whether a (delayed) work item is pending before queueing, flushing or cancelling it, so remove work_pending() tests used in those cases. Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com> ... @@ -359,8 +359,7 @@ void pm_qos_update_request(struct pm_qos_request *req, return; } - if (delayed_work_pending(&req->work)) - cancel_delayed_work_sync(&req->work); + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&req->work); ... Best Regards Qiao
next reply other threads:[~2016-09-01 9:25 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2016-09-01 9:09 qiaozhou [this message] 2016-09-01 9:09 ` [Question] about patch: don't use [delayed_]work_pending() qiaozhou 2016-09-01 18:45 ` Tejun Heo 2016-09-02 1:17 ` qiaozhou 2016-09-02 1:17 ` qiaozhou 2016-09-02 13:50 ` Tejun Heo 2016-09-02 14:21 ` Tejun Heo 2016-09-03 15:27 ` qiaozhou 2016-09-03 15:27 ` qiaozhou 2016-09-05 5:34 ` qiaozhou 2016-09-05 5:34 ` qiaozhou 2016-09-05 12:38 ` [PATCH] power: avoid calling cancel_delayed_work_sync() during early boot Tejun Heo 2016-09-05 12:58 ` Rafael J. Wysocki 2016-09-04 1:29 [Question] about patch: don't use [delayed_]work_pending() Andreas Mohr 2016-09-05 12:41 ` Tejun Heo 2016-09-05 14:14 ` Andreas Mohr
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=d2501c4c-8e7b-bea3-1b01-000b36b5dfe9@asrmicro.com \ --to=qiaozhou@asrmicro.com \ --cc=gangwu@asrmicro.com \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=tj@kernel.org \ --cc=wilburwang@asrmicro.com \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.