Re: [PATCH 13/18] rpmsg: glink: Add rx done command

From: Arun Kumar Neelakantam
Date: Wed Aug 23 2017 - 00:44:54 EST




On 8/22/2017 7:46 PM, Sricharan R wrote:
Hi,
+ÂÂÂ /* Take it off the tree of receive intents */
+ÂÂÂ if (!intent->reuse) {
+ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ spin_lock(&channel->intent_lock);
+ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ idr_remove(&channel->liids, intent->id);
+ÂÂÂÂÂÂÂ spin_unlock(&channel->intent_lock);
+ÂÂÂ }
+
+ÂÂÂ /* Schedule the sending of a rx_done indication */
+ÂÂÂ spin_lock(&channel->intent_lock);
+ÂÂÂ list_add_tail(&intent->node, &channel->done_intents);
+ÂÂÂ spin_unlock(&channel->intent_lock);
+
+ÂÂÂ schedule_work(&channel->intent_work);
Adding one more parallel path will hit performance, if this worker could not get CPU cycles
or blocked by other RT or HIGH_PRIO worker on global worker pool.
The idea is, by design to have parallel non-blocking paths for rx and tx (that is done as a
part of rx by sending the rx_done command), otherwise trying to send the rx_done
command in the rx isr context is a problem since the tx can wait for the FIFO space and
in worst case, can even lead to a potential deadlock if both the local and remote try
the same. Having said that, instead of queuing this work in to the global queue, this
can be put in to a local glink edge owned queue (or) a threaded isr ?, downstream does the
rx_done in a client specific worker.

Yes, mixing RX and TX path will cause dead lock. I am okay to use specific queue with HIGH_PRIO or a threaded isr.
down stream uses both client specific worker and client RX cb [this mix the TX and RX path] which want to avoid.

Regards,
Sricharan