From 32cf4023e689ad5b3a81a749d8cc99d7f184cb99 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: David Henningsson Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 11:05:55 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] ALSA: HDA: Lessen CPU usage when waiting for chip to respond When an IRQ for some reason gets lost, we wait up to a second using udelay, which is CPU intensive. This patch improves the situation by waiting about 30 ms in the CPU intensive mode, then stepping down to using msleep(2) instead. In essence, we trade some granularity in exchange for less CPU consumption when the waiting time is a bit longer. As a result, PulseAudio should no longer be killed by the kernel for taking up to much RT-prio CPU time. At least not for *this* reason. Signed-off-by: David Henningsson Tested-by: Arun Raghavan Cc: Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai --- sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c | 6 ++++-- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c b/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c index 6e958bf94191..1f350522bed4 100644 --- a/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c +++ b/sound/pci/hda/hda_intel.c @@ -783,11 +783,13 @@ static unsigned int azx_rirb_get_response(struct hda_bus *bus, { struct azx *chip = bus->private_data; unsigned long timeout; + unsigned long loopcounter; int do_poll = 0; again: timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(1000); - for (;;) { + + for (loopcounter = 0;; loopcounter++) { if (chip->polling_mode || do_poll) { spin_lock_irq(&chip->reg_lock); azx_update_rirb(chip); @@ -803,7 +805,7 @@ static unsigned int azx_rirb_get_response(struct hda_bus *bus, } if (time_after(jiffies, timeout)) break; - if (bus->needs_damn_long_delay) + if (bus->needs_damn_long_delay || loopcounter > 3000) msleep(2); /* temporary workaround */ else { udelay(10); -- 2.30.2