Hello, On Mon Mar 4, 2024 at 10:18 AM CET, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 07:10:54PM +0100, Théo Lebrun wrote: > > Replace the completion by a waitqueue for synchronization from IRQ > > handler to task. For short timeouts, use hrtimers, else use timers. > > Usecase: avoid blocking the I2C bus for too long when an issue occurs. > > > > The threshold picked is one jiffy: if timeout is below that, use > > hrtimers. This threshold is NOT configurable. > > > > Implement behavior but do NOT change fetching of timeout. This means the > > timeout is unchanged (200ms) and the hrtimer case will never trigger. > > > > A waitqueue is used because it supports both desired timeout approaches. > > See wait_event_timeout() and wait_event_hrtimeout(). An atomic boolean > > serves as synchronization condition. > > > > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Théo Lebrun <theo.lebrun@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Largely: > > Reviewed-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Thanks for the reviews Wolfram. > Nit: > > > - int timeout; > > + int timeout_usecs; > > I think 'unsigned' makes a lot of sense here. Maybe u32 even? Yes unsigned would make sense. unsigned int or u32, I wouldn't know which to pick. Regards, -- Théo Lebrun, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
