[PATCH] amba-pl011: simplify TX handling
Jakub Kiciński
moorray3 at wp.pl
Wed Mar 18 13:26:09 PDT 2015
On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 17:41:57 +0000, Dave P Martin wrote:
> > This is exactly what I did:
> > # stty -F /dev/ttyAMA0 115200 -onlcr
> > # cat 1MB_text_file > /dev/ttyAMA0
> > ^C
> > Now AMA0 is dead. If I waited until the whole file was written,
> > everything was fine. This was 100% reproducible and I later checked
> > that on .shutdown() the FIFO was full (no IRQ pending yet). Initially I
> > tried to play around with CR programming on .shutdown() but it didn't
> > change anything (according to Broadcom docs one should be very careful
> > not to touch CR while UART is busy).
>
> Interesting... I missed this because the systemd issue that got me
> started on this only shows up of the console is on the PL011. Once
> a shell is running on ttyAMA0, the port is always open, so the effects
> of shutting down and restarting the pl011 are not seen.
>
> I'm actually suspicious of the correct behaviour here. serial_core
> waits for the UART to drain via uart_wait_until_sent(), but there are
> some oddities:
>
> * The wait is abandoned early if there is a pending signal. This
> means that some output already sent to the kernel via write() is
> is simply lost. This feels a bit odd -- for all other I/O I can
> think of, write() does not guarantee that the data has reached
> its destination, but on return it usually does guarantee that the
> data _will_ reach its destination (except for unrecoverable I/O
> errors).
>
> This behaviour does mean that pl011_shutdown() is invoked with
> a non-empty FIFO if the only process with the port open is killed
> by a signal while output is pending, causing the hangup.
>
> * uart_wait_until_sent()'s timeout calculations aim to wait for
> no longer than it takes the FIFO to drain. However, this function
> can get called when the serial_core xmit queue for the port is
> very non-empty -- meaning that the FIFO continues to be topped
> up for some time. This can cause more data to be lost.
I confess that the way serial_core works is not very intuitive for me
either, I can only add to your list. For instance I observed
that .start_tx() called eight times during the initial load. Why?
Obviously the first one fills up the FIFO and the subsequent just waste
CPU time. I remember looking at the serial_core and it seemed like the
repeated calls must be coming from the higher layers... Admittedly I was
too lazy to just add a dump_stack() and see for myself ;)
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list