From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Guzman Lugo, Fernando" Subject: RE: [PATCH B 3/3] tidspbridge: decreate timeout to a saner value Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 19:00:34 -0500 Message-ID: <496565EC904933469F292DDA3F1663E60287D628DC@dlee06.ent.ti.com> References: <1237339605-20697-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1237339605-20697-2-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1237339605-20697-3-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1237339605-20697-4-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <496565EC904933469F292DDA3F1663E60287D6286E@dlee06.ent.ti.com> <94a0d4530903191404y14b5331eoaccb3f11c1846f9d@mail.gmail.com> <496565EC904933469F292DDA3F1663E60287D62895@dlee06.ent.ti.com> <94a0d4530903191435g7785a334v6e0a6988f344bbc@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: Received: from comal.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.152]:57492 "EHLO comal.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751191AbZCTAAq convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:00:46 -0400 In-Reply-To: <94a0d4530903191435g7785a334v6e0a6988f344bbc@mail.gmail.com> Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Felipe Contreras Cc: "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "Kanigeri, Hari" , Hiroshi DOYU , Ameya Palande , Felipe Contreras This is a stress test, it creates 4 processes and each process will do 1000 transfers using streams, so the trace is: STRM_Issue -> WMD_CHNL_AddIOReq -> IO_Schedule IO_Schedule schedules a call to IO_DPC using task let. IO_DPC -> IO_DispatchChnl -> InputChnl -> CHNLSM_InterruptDSP2 Also IO_DispatchChnl -> OutputChnl -> CHNLSM_InterruptDSP2. As we can call a lot CHNLSM_InterruptDSP2 in this test, there is a problem with the timeout. However running other tests, videos and mp3 there no problems. I think we should change to 10ms, only to make sure there is no problem when CHNLSM_InterruptDSP2 is called a lot. Let me know if you are agreed. Or have some comments about it. Regards, Fernando. -----Original Message----- From: Felipe Contreras [mailto:felipe.contreras@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 3:35 PM To: Guzman Lugo, Fernando Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org; Kanigeri, Hari; Hiroshi DOYU; Ameya Palande; Felipe Contreras Subject: Re: [PATCH B 3/3] tidspbridge: decreate timeout to a saner value On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 11:19 PM, Guzman Lugo, Fernando wrote: > > Yes, I applied this; in fact I have applied all the patches. If I increase the timeout there are no problems. The test I run creates 4 process and each one does several a lot of calls to InputChnl and OutputChnl, so I think this test is using the mailbox a lot and would be better a bigger timeout. What do you think? How fast are these messages sent? Can you track down which functions are calling CHNLSM_InterruptDSP2 and making these timeouts happen. I think it's safe to leave the timeout at 10, but that means it's possible the code will be busy-looping up to 10 ms which will increase the CPU load. Somebody from Nokia (Siarhei?) suggested to idle-wait for the mbox empty irq, I think that's the best way to implement this, but at least for the use cases I'm interested in (video encoding/decoding) timeouts don't seem to be an issue anymore. -- Felipe Contreras