On Fri, Oct 30, 2026 at 11:54 AM Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2026 at 11:09:53AM -0600, James Hilliard wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 30, 2026 at 3:40 AM Andy Shevchenko > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2026 at 11:19:59AM -0600, James Hilliard wrote: > > > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2026 at 8:24 AM Andy Shevchenko > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2026 at 01:37:02AM -0600, James Hilliard wrote: > > ... > > > > > > > + while (rx_ret || tx_ret) { > > > > > > + dev_err_ratelimited(p->port.dev, > > > > > > + "DMA termination failed: RX %d, > > > > > > TX %d; retrying\n", > > > > > > + rx_ret, tx_ret); > > > > > > > > > > > + msleep(100); > > > > > > > > > > Huh?! > > > > > > > > > > > + if (rx_ret) > > > > > > + rx_ret = > > > > > > dmaengine_terminate_sync(dma->rxchan); > > > > > > + if (tx_ret) > > > > > > + tx_ret = > > > > > > dmaengine_terminate_sync(dma->txchan); > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > > This is unacceptable. Sleeping is okay, but value should really match > > > > > the > > > > > baudspeed and other parameters of the transfer. > > > > > > > > This sleep is backoff after dmaengine_terminate_sync() has returned > > > > an error, rather than an estimate of UART transmission time. Each > > > > retry asks the provider to stop the channel again; elapsed time is > > > > never treated as evidence that the resources are safe to free. > > > > > > > > The particular 100 ms interval has no hardware-derived justification. > > > > However, I don't yet see a sound way to derive the retry cadence from > > > > baud rate either. RX can be waiting for input, TX can be held by flow > > > > control, and callback retirement is a separate requirement from > > > > moving bytes through the UART. > > > > > > > > Do you have a particular provider failure mode in mind where retrying > > > > termination should follow the serial transfer timing? I'd like to > > > > base the interval on the condition that can make termination succeed, > > > > rather than substitute a wire-time estimate for an arbitrary delay. > > > > > > Termination of DMA sometimes require to clean up internal FIFOs and other > > > state > > > machines. That's what happens on HW side. In the software waiting for too > > > much > > > may lead to the very big undesired latencies. The value of 100ms sounds > > > insane > > > to me for the HSUART cases (megabaud range of speed). Also note, not > > > every PCB > > > design uses HW flow control, so this may be even worse for them. > > > > The 100 ms interval can add unnecessary teardown latency if a failed > > termination becomes retryable much sooner. There is no hardware-derived > > justification for that particular value. > > > > The FIFO/state-machine draining is part of the provider's stop sequence. > > For example, DW performs its FIFO-empty polling inside > > dwc_terminate_all(). If termination succeeds, this patch proceeds without > > the retry sleep, regardless of baud rate. The sleep is only reached > > after an error during DMA release, not during normal RX delivery. > > > > Baud rate can influence how quickly a transmit FIFO drains, even without > > flow control. However, the termination error does not tell 8250 whether > > that drain is still progressing, how much remains, or whether the > > controller needs a different recovery operation. That distinction matters > > when choosing a retry interval: a shorter interval reduces the added > > latency, but does not establish that retrying can recover the channel. > > > > There is also a specific API detail here: dmaengine_terminate_sync() > > returns immediately if device_terminate_all() fails, without reaching > > dmaengine_synchronize(). Consequently, an error leaves callback draining > > unconfirmed as well. The retry cadence can change, but resource release > > still requires successful termination and synchronization. > > Most likely this is AI slop. I can't see the justification for 100ms. > Can you explain that?
100 ms was an arbitrary backoff to avoid a tight retry loop if termination keeps failing. It was not derived from the baud rate, FIFO depth, or a DMA provider's recovery timing. That motivation explains sleeping between retries, but not choosing 100 ms. I don't have evidence supporting that particular interval. > > > > > Regardless of the retry interval, shutdown cannot release the buffers > > > > until the provider establishes that DMA and its callbacks have stopped. > > -- > With Best Regards, > Andy Shevchenko > >
