From: Yunfeng Ye
> Sent: 17 October 2019 15:20
> On 2019/10/17 22:00, David Laight wrote:
> > From: Yunfeng Ye
> >> Sent: 17 October 2019 14:26
> > ...
> -for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
> +i = 0;
> +timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(100);
> +do {
On 2019/10/17 21:54, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 09:26:15PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2019/10/16 23:32, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 12:45:16PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
If psci_ops.affinity_info() fails, it will sleep 10ms, which will not
On 2019/10/17 22:00, David Laight wrote:
> From: Yunfeng Ye
>> Sent: 17 October 2019 14:26
> ...
- for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
+ i = 0;
+ timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(100);
+ do {
err = psci_ops.affinity_info(cpu_logical_map(cpu), 0);
On 2019/10/16 23:05, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 07:29:59PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2019/10/16 18:25, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 11:22:23AM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
On 2019/10/16 0:23, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On
From: Yunfeng Ye
> Sent: 17 October 2019 14:26
...
> >> - for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
> >> + i = 0;
> >> + timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(100);
> >> + do {
> >>err = psci_ops.affinity_info(cpu_logical_map(cpu), 0);
> >>if (err == PSCI_0_2_AFFINITY_LEVEL_OFF) {
> >>
On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 09:26:15PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
>
>
> On 2019/10/16 23:32, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 12:45:16PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
> >> If psci_ops.affinity_info() fails, it will sleep 10ms, which will not
> >> take so long in the right case. Use usleep_range
On 2019/10/16 23:32, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 12:45:16PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
>> If psci_ops.affinity_info() fails, it will sleep 10ms, which will not
>> take so long in the right case. Use usleep_range() instead of msleep(),
>> reduce the waiting time, and give a chance
On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 12:45:16PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
> If psci_ops.affinity_info() fails, it will sleep 10ms, which will not
> take so long in the right case. Use usleep_range() instead of msleep(),
> reduce the waiting time, and give a chance to busy wait before sleep.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yu
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 07:29:59PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
>
>
> On 2019/10/16 18:25, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 11:22:23AM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2019/10/16 0:23, Will Deacon wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 07:21:17PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye
On 2019/10/16 18:25, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 11:22:23AM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2019/10/16 0:23, Will Deacon wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 07:21:17PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
If psci_ops.affinity_info() fails, it will sleep 10ms, which wil
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 11:22:23AM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
>
>
> On 2019/10/16 0:23, Will Deacon wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 07:21:17PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
> >> If psci_ops.affinity_info() fails, it will sleep 10ms, which will not
> >> take so long in the right case. Use us
On 2019/10/16 0:23, Will Deacon wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 07:21:17PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
>> If psci_ops.affinity_info() fails, it will sleep 10ms, which will not
>> take so long in the right case. Use usleep_range() instead of msleep(),
>> reduce the waiting time, and give a
Hi,
On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 07:21:17PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
> If psci_ops.affinity_info() fails, it will sleep 10ms, which will not
> take so long in the right case. Use usleep_range() instead of msleep(),
> reduce the waiting time, and give a chance to busy wait before sleep.
Can you elabora
13 matches
Mail list logo
