Andreas Oberritter writes:
> On Tue, 2006-03-14 at 01:03 +0100, Oliver Endriss wrote:
> > Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> > > From: Andreas Oberritter <obi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Added variable 'error' to struct dvb_ringbuffer, which is set to zero on
> > > init() and flush(). Also reset read an write pointers to zero on flush()
> > > to get less fragmented data.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Andreas Oberritter <obi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > A patch to make dmxdev use dvb_ringbuffer will follow.
> > >
> > > diff -r 427667c87c7b linux/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dvb_ringbuffer.c
> > > --- a/linux/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dvb_ringbuffer.c Sun Mar 12 00:03:47 2006 -0300
> > > +++ b/linux/drivers/media/dvb/dvb-core/dvb_ringbuffer.c Mon Mar 13 16:02:46 2006 +0100
> > > ...
> > > @@ -86,7 +87,8 @@ ssize_t dvb_ringbuffer_avail(struct dvb_
> > >
> > > void dvb_ringbuffer_flush(struct dvb_ringbuffer *rbuf)
> > > {
> > > - rbuf->pread = rbuf->pwrite;
> > > + rbuf->pread = rbuf->pwrite = 0;
> > +++
> >
> > Attention, this will convert dvb_ringbuffer_flush() into a writer!
> >
> > from dvb_ringbuffer.h:
> > | ** (2) If there is exactly one reader and one writer, there is no need
> > | ** to lock read or write operations.
> > | ** Two or more readers must be locked against each other.
> > | ** Flushing the buffer counts as a read operation.
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > | ** Two or more writers must be locked against each other.
> >
> > With this patch flushing the ring buffer is a read _and_ a write
> > operation. It might break existing code. Are you aware of that?
>
> Oliver, can you please take a look at the existing code? It's a
> performance gain if it doesn't break.
It will definitely break the code. Just look at the writing calls.
If pwrite changes to 0 right in the middle of one, you will have problems.
For this case (pwrite=0) you should not get segmentation faults
but pwrite can end up in a wrong position (!=0) and there will be
some bogus data at the beginning of the buffer.
> Generally I'd expect a flush to return a buffer into its initial state.
Then you will have to add mutexes and/or locks, at least in the
write and flush calls. This will of course complicate the code and
also harm performance. But maybe in your case less than the
fragmentation you were talking about?
Ralph
_______________________________________________
linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
