On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 09:58:55PM +0100, Martin Sperl wrote: > Maybe a bigger change to the reduce the complexity of > the state machine would solve that problem and also > reduce code complexity... Yeah, that's where I was getting to with that test patch I posted. > I may find some time over the weekend if no solution > has been found until then. Thanks for volunteering :) > The way I would envision it it would have a “state” > as a level (0=shutdown, 1=hw enabled, 2=in pump, > 3=in transfer, 4=in hw-mode,...) and a complete > to allow waking the shutdown thread (and by this > avoiding the busy wait loop we have now). > This would replace those idling, busy, and running flags. That's a good idea, yes - a single enum much more reflects what we can actually do in terms of transitions. > Drawback: it is invasive, but let us see what it > really looks like... I think we need to either drop your change (which would be bad since it is a big performance improvement, I'd punted it for later when I did the original refactoring to push the work into the caller threads then never got around to it) or have a invasive changes to make the new situation clearer. Right now things are just far too complex to reason about which isn't helping anyone.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
