Hi Victor, I don't think it's a good idea to block an entire IRQ line for so much time (i.e. until a work queue runs), unless you're sure you're the sole user of it. How about you try a more traditional approach and make the IRQ handler schedule a work queue after it completes? Or, if you need to run as fast as possible, why don't you create a tasklet? Remember that you can't sleep in this case. - Richard 2015-01-13 11:51 GMT-02:00 Victor Ascroft <victorascroft@gmail.com>:

Hello,

Is it ok to use wait_for_completion in a workqueue?

static void my_work(struct work_struct *work) {

while (true) { wait_for_completion(completion);

// Do something here

reinit_completion(completion); enable_irq(irq); } }

static irqreturn_t my_irq_handler(int irq, void *dev) { disable_irq(irq);

complete(completion);

return IRQ_HANDLED; }

Something like the above is what I have. Is it a correct way to do things or complete idiotic brainfart. Workqueues can sleep so I thought of the above code, but, was not sure.

And I am not using _interruptible or _interruptible_timeout because I absolutely want it to wait for the IRQ. Now as such though this works I get stack traces with hung task complaining and I have to set /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs to 0. And were the IRQ not generated I do get NMI watchdog hang.

I will accept I have only little knowledge of these things.

Regards, Victor.

_______________________________________________ Kernelnewbies mailing list Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies