On Fri, 30 Jun 2017 00:50:03 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 01:58:22PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Thu, 29 Jun 2017 21:44:55 +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > > > Since this swake_up() --> swake_up_all() reportedly *fixed* the one wake up > > > > issue it would seem this does queue [0]. That said, I don't see any simple tests > > > > tools/testing/selftests/swait but then again we don't have test for regular > > > > waits either... > > > > > > > > [0] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195477 > > > > > > I should also note that the swake_up_all() should have only helped in cases where > > > 3 cards were used, as if only 2 were used that should have been covered by just > > > the swake_up(). Unless of course I hear otherwise by the reporter, Nicolas or > > > from Jakub. > > > > I was hitting this with 2 cards. > > Thanks! > > Thing is I'm not convinced the issue with 2 cards was the swake_up() Vs > swake_up_all() in this case though. Let's recall also the missing wake up on > errors! And the fact that netronome has optional firmware, which naturally can > fail. > > So could the issue with 2 cards instead of the miss of a wake up on error due > to batched requests ? If so then that still would not put blame on the > swake_up()! Sorry, that was during manual tests. I had the driver request the firmware with _nowait() without an uevent, and then after I manually wrote -1 to loading only one would get woken up. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
