Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1349914
| From | Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: added spinlock on transmit function |
| Date | 2016-03-04 08:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <r8Sls-38B-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <r8kMN-4cl-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <r8kMN-4cl-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
Hi, "Felipe F. Tonello" <eu@felipetonello.com> writes: > [ text/plain ] > Since f_midi_transmit is called by both ALSA and USB frameworks, it can > potentially cause a race condition between both calls. This is bad because the > way f_midi_transmit is implemented can't handle concurrent calls. This is due > to the fact that the usb request fifo looks for the next element and only if > it has data to process it enqueues the request, otherwise re-uses it. If both > (ALSA and USB) frameworks calls this function at the same time, the > kfifo_seek() will return the same usb_request, which will cause a race > condition. > > To solve this problem a syncronization mechanism is necessary. In this case it > is used a spinlock since f_midi_transmit is also called by usb_request->complete > callback in interrupt context. > > On benchmarks realized by me, spinlocks were more efficient then scheduling > the f_midi_transmit tasklet in process context and using a mutex to > synchronize. Also it performs better then previous implementation that > allocated a usb_request for every new transmit made. behaves better in what way ? Also, previous implementation would not suffer from this concurrency problem, right ? -- balbi
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: added spinlock on transmit function "Felipe F. Tonello" <eu@felipetonello.com> - 2016-03-02 20:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: added spinlock on transmit function Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org> - 2016-03-04 08:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: added spinlock on transmit function Felipe Ferreri Tonello <eu@felipetonello.com> - 2016-03-04 19:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: added spinlock on transmit function Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org> - 2016-03-07 08:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: added spinlock on transmit function Felipe Ferreri Tonello <eu@felipetonello.com> - 2016-03-07 10:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: added spinlock on transmit function Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org> - 2016-03-08 08:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: added spinlock on transmit function Felipe Ferreri Tonello <eu@felipetonello.com> - 2016-03-08 14:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: added spinlock on transmit function Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org> - 2016-03-08 15:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: added spinlock on transmit function Felipe Ferreri Tonello <eu@felipetonello.com> - 2016-03-08 16:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: gadget: f_midi: added spinlock on transmit function Felipe Balbi <balbi@kernel.org> - 2016-03-09 08:30 +0100
csiph-web