Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1731317 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-09-13 03:00 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-09-15 17:30 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] tpm: define __wait_for_tpm_stat to specify variable polling sleep time Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-09-13 03:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] tpm: define __wait_for_tpm_stat to specify variable polling sleep time Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2017-09-15 14:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] tpm: define __wait_for_tpm_stat to specify variable polling sleep time Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> - 2017-09-15 17:30 +0200
| From | Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-09-13 03:00 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] tpm: define __wait_for_tpm_stat to specify variable polling sleep time |
| Message-ID | <up4c2-bu-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 08:56:37AM -0400, Nayna Jain wrote:
> The existing wait_for_tpm_stat() checks the chip status before
> sleeping for 5 msec in a polling loop. For some functions although
> the status isn't ready immediately, the status returns extremely
> quickly. Waiting for 5 msec causes an unnecessary delay. An
> example is the send() call in the tpms_tis driver.
>
> This patch defines __wait_for_tpm_stat(), allowing the caller
> to specify the polling sleep timeout value within the loop.
> The existing wait_for_tpm_stat() becomes a wrapper for this
> function.
>
> After this change, performance on a TPM 1.2 with an 8 byte
> burstcount for 1000 extends improved from ~14sec to ~10sec.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Acked-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Please get rid of wait_for_tpm_stat() rather than further making it more
complex. It's hardware specific stuff. This function should not exist in
tpm-interface.c.
/Jarkko
> ---
> drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
> drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h | 3 +++
> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 11 ++++++-----
> 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
> index 1d6729be4cd6..b23d006243b7 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
> @@ -1050,8 +1050,9 @@ static bool wait_for_tpm_stat_cond(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask,
> return false;
> }
>
> -int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
> - wait_queue_head_t *queue, bool check_cancel)
> +int __wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
> + unsigned int poll_sleep, wait_queue_head_t *queue,
> + bool check_cancel)
> {
> unsigned long stop;
> long rc;
> @@ -1085,7 +1086,7 @@ int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
> }
> } else {
> do {
> - tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT);
> + tpm_msleep(poll_sleep);
> status = chip->ops->status(chip);
> if ((status & mask) == mask)
> return 0;
> @@ -1093,6 +1094,14 @@ int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
> }
> return -ETIME;
> }
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__wait_for_tpm_stat);
> +
> +int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
> + wait_queue_head_t *queue, bool check_cancel)
> +{
> + return __wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, mask, timeout, TPM_TIMEOUT,
> + queue, check_cancel);
> +}
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(wait_for_tpm_stat);
>
> #define TPM_ORD_SAVESTATE 152
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
> index 2d5466a72e40..eb2f8818eded 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
> @@ -525,6 +525,9 @@ int tpm_do_selftest(struct tpm_chip *chip);
> unsigned long tpm_calc_ordinal_duration(struct tpm_chip *chip, u32 ordinal);
> int tpm_pm_suspend(struct device *dev);
> int tpm_pm_resume(struct device *dev);
> +int __wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask,
> + unsigned long timeout, unsigned int poll_sleep,
> + wait_queue_head_t *queue, bool check_cancel);
> int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
> wait_queue_head_t *queue, bool check_cancel);
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
> index 6b9bf4c4d434..d1eab29cb447 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
> @@ -268,8 +268,8 @@ static int tpm_tis_send_data(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t len)
> status = tpm_tis_status(chip);
> if ((status & TPM_STS_COMMAND_READY) == 0) {
> tpm_tis_ready(chip);
> - if (wait_for_tpm_stat
> - (chip, TPM_STS_COMMAND_READY, chip->timeout_b,
> + if (__wait_for_tpm_stat
> + (chip, TPM_STS_COMMAND_READY, chip->timeout_b, 1,
> &priv->int_queue, false) < 0) {
> rc = -ETIME;
> goto out_err;
> @@ -303,7 +303,8 @@ static int tpm_tis_send_data(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t len)
> if (ignore_burst_count)
> continue;
>
> - if (wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, TPM_STS_VALID, chip->timeout_c,
> + if (__wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, TPM_STS_VALID,
> + chip->timeout_c, 1,
> &priv->int_queue, false) < 0) {
> rc = -ETIME;
> goto out_err;
> @@ -320,8 +321,8 @@ static int tpm_tis_send_data(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t len)
> if (rc < 0)
> goto out_err;
>
> - if (wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, TPM_STS_VALID, chip->timeout_c,
> - &priv->int_queue, false) < 0) {
> + if (__wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, TPM_STS_VALID, chip->timeout_c,
> + 1, &priv->int_queue, false) < 0) {
> rc = -ETIME;
> goto out_err;
> }
> --
> 2.13.3
>
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-09-15 14:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <upY4z-2MI-27@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1731317 |
On 09/13/2017 06:28 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 08:56:37AM -0400, Nayna Jain wrote:
>> The existing wait_for_tpm_stat() checks the chip status before
>> sleeping for 5 msec in a polling loop. For some functions although
>> the status isn't ready immediately, the status returns extremely
>> quickly. Waiting for 5 msec causes an unnecessary delay. An
>> example is the send() call in the tpms_tis driver.
>>
>> This patch defines __wait_for_tpm_stat(), allowing the caller
>> to specify the polling sleep timeout value within the loop.
>> The existing wait_for_tpm_stat() becomes a wrapper for this
>> function.
>>
>> After this change, performance on a TPM 1.2 with an 8 byte
>> burstcount for 1000 extends improved from ~14sec to ~10sec.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> Acked-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Please get rid of wait_for_tpm_stat() rather than further making it more
> complex. It's hardware specific stuff. This function should not exist in
> tpm-interface.c.
I think I didn't understand the meaning of "get rid of wait_for_tpm_stat()".
Do you mean to take care of it in driver specific file ?
Can you please elaborate it ?
Thanks & Regards,
- Nayna
>
> /Jarkko
>
>> ---
>> drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
>> drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h | 3 +++
>> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 11 ++++++-----
>> 3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
>> index 1d6729be4cd6..b23d006243b7 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
>> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c
>> @@ -1050,8 +1050,9 @@ static bool wait_for_tpm_stat_cond(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask,
>> return false;
>> }
>>
>> -int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
>> - wait_queue_head_t *queue, bool check_cancel)
>> +int __wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
>> + unsigned int poll_sleep, wait_queue_head_t *queue,
>> + bool check_cancel)
>> {
>> unsigned long stop;
>> long rc;
>> @@ -1085,7 +1086,7 @@ int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
>> }
>> } else {
>> do {
>> - tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT);
>> + tpm_msleep(poll_sleep);
>> status = chip->ops->status(chip);
>> if ((status & mask) == mask)
>> return 0;
>> @@ -1093,6 +1094,14 @@ int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
>> }
>> return -ETIME;
>> }
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__wait_for_tpm_stat);
>> +
>> +int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
>> + wait_queue_head_t *queue, bool check_cancel)
>> +{
>> + return __wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, mask, timeout, TPM_TIMEOUT,
>> + queue, check_cancel);
>> +}
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(wait_for_tpm_stat);
>>
>> #define TPM_ORD_SAVESTATE 152
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
>> index 2d5466a72e40..eb2f8818eded 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
>> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
>> @@ -525,6 +525,9 @@ int tpm_do_selftest(struct tpm_chip *chip);
>> unsigned long tpm_calc_ordinal_duration(struct tpm_chip *chip, u32 ordinal);
>> int tpm_pm_suspend(struct device *dev);
>> int tpm_pm_resume(struct device *dev);
>> +int __wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask,
>> + unsigned long timeout, unsigned int poll_sleep,
>> + wait_queue_head_t *queue, bool check_cancel);
>> int wait_for_tpm_stat(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 mask, unsigned long timeout,
>> wait_queue_head_t *queue, bool check_cancel);
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> index 6b9bf4c4d434..d1eab29cb447 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
>> @@ -268,8 +268,8 @@ static int tpm_tis_send_data(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t len)
>> status = tpm_tis_status(chip);
>> if ((status & TPM_STS_COMMAND_READY) == 0) {
>> tpm_tis_ready(chip);
>> - if (wait_for_tpm_stat
>> - (chip, TPM_STS_COMMAND_READY, chip->timeout_b,
>> + if (__wait_for_tpm_stat
>> + (chip, TPM_STS_COMMAND_READY, chip->timeout_b, 1,
>> &priv->int_queue, false) < 0) {
>> rc = -ETIME;
>> goto out_err;
>> @@ -303,7 +303,8 @@ static int tpm_tis_send_data(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t len)
>> if (ignore_burst_count)
>> continue;
>>
>> - if (wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, TPM_STS_VALID, chip->timeout_c,
>> + if (__wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, TPM_STS_VALID,
>> + chip->timeout_c, 1,
>> &priv->int_queue, false) < 0) {
>> rc = -ETIME;
>> goto out_err;
>> @@ -320,8 +321,8 @@ static int tpm_tis_send_data(struct tpm_chip *chip, u8 *buf, size_t len)
>> if (rc < 0)
>> goto out_err;
>>
>> - if (wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, TPM_STS_VALID, chip->timeout_c,
>> - &priv->int_queue, false) < 0) {
>> + if (__wait_for_tpm_stat(chip, TPM_STS_VALID, chip->timeout_c,
>> + 1, &priv->int_queue, false) < 0) {
>> rc = -ETIME;
>> goto out_err;
>> }
>> --
>> 2.13.3
>>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-09-15 17:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uq0J4-4Ms-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1732868 |
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 06:07:26PM +0530, Nayna Jain wrote: > > > On 09/13/2017 06:28 AM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 06, 2017 at 08:56:37AM -0400, Nayna Jain wrote: > > > The existing wait_for_tpm_stat() checks the chip status before > > > sleeping for 5 msec in a polling loop. For some functions although > > > the status isn't ready immediately, the status returns extremely > > > quickly. Waiting for 5 msec causes an unnecessary delay. An > > > example is the send() call in the tpms_tis driver. > > > > > > This patch defines __wait_for_tpm_stat(), allowing the caller > > > to specify the polling sleep timeout value within the loop. > > > The existing wait_for_tpm_stat() becomes a wrapper for this > > > function. > > > > > > After this change, performance on a TPM 1.2 with an 8 byte > > > burstcount for 1000 extends improved from ~14sec to ~10sec. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Nayna Jain <nayna@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > > Acked-by: Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > Please get rid of wait_for_tpm_stat() rather than further making it more > > complex. It's hardware specific stuff. This function should not exist in > > tpm-interface.c. > > I think I didn't understand the meaning of "get rid of wait_for_tpm_stat()". > Do you mean to take care of it in driver specific file ? > Can you please elaborate it ? > > Thanks & Regards, > - Nayna It's not a generic function. It's used only in tpm_tis and tpm-xenfront. They should have their owen private functions for this. Here the sharing of code makes zero sense. /Jarkko
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web