All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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


             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: link
Be 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.