I'd have to review more closely, but I think that's fine, as this
is how most work queues are used: you can queue the same function
multiple times, and it's guaranteed to run at least once after
the last queue, so if you queue it while it's already running,
it will be called again, otherwise it won't.
In the scenario I described the issue is not that the second call to
queue the work function is lost. The problem is that when we setup the
second call we may overwrite elements of the phy's hisi_sas_wq struct
which may be still being referenced in the work function for the first call.
Do you mean these members?
+ wq->event = PHYUP;
+ wq->hisi_hba = hisi_hba;
+ wq->phy_no = phy_no;
Yes, these are the members I was referring to. However there is also an
element "data" in hisi_sas_wq. This is used in control phy as follows:
int hisi_sas_control_phy(struct asd_sas_phy *sas_phy,
enum phy_func func,
void *funcdata)
{
...
wq->event = CONTROL_PHY;
wq->data = func;
...
INIT_WORK(&wq->work_struct, hisi_sas_wq_process);
queue_work(hisi_hba->wq, &wq->work_struct);
}
void hisi_sas_wq_process(struct work_struct *work)
{
struct hisi_sas_wq *wq =
container_of(work, struct hisi_sas_wq, work_struct);
switch (wq->event) {
case CONTROL_PHY:
hisi_sas_control_phy_work(hisi_hba, wq->data, phy_no);
}
static void hisi_sas_control_phy_work(struct hisi_hba *hisi_hba,
int func,
int phy_no)
{
switch (func) {
case PHY_FUNC_HARD_RESET:
hard_phy_reset_v1_hw(hisi_hba, phy_no)
Sorry for being unclear, I implied getting rid of them, by having a
work queue per phy. You can create a structure for each phy like
struct hisi_sas_phy {
struct hisi_sas *dev; /* pointer to the device */
unsigned int phy_no;
struct work_struct phyup_work;
};
There are probably other things you can put into the same structure.
When the phy is brought up, you then just start the phyup work for
that phy, which can retrieve its hisi_sas_phy structure from the
work_struct pointer, and from there get to the device.
Arnd
.
We could create a work_struct for each event, which would be fine.
However we would sometimes still need some way of passing data to the
event, like the phy control example.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
