Hi Victor,
I don't think it's a good idea to block an entire IRQ line for so much time (i.e. until a work queue runs), unless you're sure you're the sole user of it.
How about you try a more traditional approach and make the IRQ handler schedule a work queue after it completes?
Or, if you need to run as fast as possible, why don't you create a tasklet? Remember that you can't sleep in this case.
- Richard
2015-01-13 11:51 GMT-02:00 Victor Ascroft <victorascroft@xxxxxxxxx>:
Hello,
Is it ok to use wait_for_completion in a workqueue?
static void my_work(struct work_struct *work)
{
while (true)
{
wait_for_completion(completion);
// Do something here
reinit_completion(completion);
enable_irq(irq);
}
}
static irqreturn_t my_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev)
{
disable_irq(irq);
complete(completion);
return IRQ_HANDLED;
}
Something like the above is what I have. Is it a correct way to
do things or complete idiotic brainfart. Workqueues can sleep so
I thought of the above code, but, was not sure.
And I am not using _interruptible or _interruptible_timeout because
I absolutely want it to wait for the IRQ. Now as such though this
works I get stack traces with hung task complaining and I have
to set /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs to 0. And were the IRQ
not generated I do get NMI watchdog hang.
I will accept I have only little knowledge of these things.
Regards,
Victor.
_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
_______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
