Closed mriswyth closed 8 years ago
Unless I'm missing something, this code doesn't exist in for-later, so I'm not sure if it's worth messing with.
Yeah.. but now I'm curious about this.
Maybe that is why we have major performance issues.
Okay, so it is just forcing a poll wait before looking at the queue and a similar issue with interrupt_rcvd is happening in the visornic driver as well. Wonder if anyone will notice.
Yeah, we will still timeout every 2ms (devdata->thread_wait_ms), so we'll poll 500 times/second.
Since this wait is necessary now and is removed in for-later there isn't a benefit to doing anything with the current version. I noticed that for-later still contains the now unreferenced interrupt_rcvd so I'm going to create a Kanban item to remove interrupt_rcvd from for-later since for-later isn't in a state to have patches put in right now.
visorhba's process_incoming_rsps contains a wait_event_interruptible_timeout call that is waiting for interrupt_rcvd to be equal to 1, but interrupt_rcvd is never set.
This smells odd, do we think it is right? If it is then perhaps a comment is in order.