Re: [PATCH v2] usb:gadget:uvc Do not use worker thread to pump usb requests

[Jayant Chowdhary]

Hi,

On 10/30/23 23:11, Jayant Chowdhary wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10/28/23 07:09, Jayant Chowdhary wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 10/28/23 04:10, Michael Grzeschik wrote:
>>> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 10:58:11AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 03:39:44PM +0200, Michael Grzeschik wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 02:47:52PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 01:10:21PM +0200, Michael Grzeschik wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 10:51:17AM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 26, 2023 at 09:56:35PM +0000, Jayant Chowdhary wrote:
>>>>>>>>> This patch is based on top of
>>>>>>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/20230930184821.310143-1-arakesh@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#t:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When we use an async work queue to perform the function of pumping
>>>>>>>>> usb requests to the usb controller, it is possible that thread scheduling
>>>>>>>>> affects at what cadence we're able to pump requests. This could mean usb
>>>>>>>>> requests miss their uframes - resulting in video stream flickers on the host
>>>>>>>>> device.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In this patch, we move the pumping of usb requests to
>>>>>>>>> 1) uvcg_video_complete() complete handler for both isoc + bulk
>>>>>>>>>     endpoints. We still send 0 length requests when there is no uvc buffer
>>>>>>>>>     available to encode.
>>>>>>>> This means you will end up copying large amounts of data in interrupt
>>>>>>>> context. The work queue was there to avoid exactly that, as it will
>>>>>>>> introduce delays that can affect other parts of the system. I think this
>>>>>>>> is a problem.
>>>>>>> Regarding Thin's argument about possible scheduling latency that is already
>>>>>>> introducing real errors, this seemed like a good solution.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But sure, this potential latency introduced in the interrupt context can
>>>>>>> trigger other side effects.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However I think we need some compromise since both arguments are very valid.
>>>>>> Agreed.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Any ideas, how to solve this?
>>>>>> I'm afraid not.
>>>>> We discussed this and came to the conclusion that we could make use of
>>>>> kthread_create and sched_setattr with an attr->sched_policy = SCHED_DEADLINE
>>>>> here instead of the workqueue. This way we would ensure that the worker
>>>>> would be triggered with hard definitions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Since the SG case is not that heavy on the completion handler, we could
>>>>> also make this kthread conditionaly to the memcpy case.
>>>> If you don't mind a naive suggestion from someone who knows nothing
>>>> about the driver...
>>>>
>>>> An attractive possibility is to have the work queue (or kthread) do the
>>>> time-consuming copying, but leave the submission up to the completion
>>>> handler.  If the data isn't ready (or there's no data to send) when the
>>>> handler runs, then queue a 0-length request.
>>>>
>>>> That will give you the best of both worlds: low latency while in
>>>> interrupt context and a steady, constant flow of USB transfers at all
>>>> times.  The question of how to schedule the work queue or kthread is a
>>>> separate matter, not directly relevant to this design decision.
>>> That's it. This is probably the best way to tackle the overall problem.
>>>
>>> So we leave the call of the encode callback to the worker, that will
>>> probably still can be a workqueue. The complete callback is calling
>>> the explicit uvcg_video_ep_queue when prepared requests are available
>>> and if there is nothing pending it will just enqueue zero requests.
>>>
>>> Thank you Alan, this makes so much sense!
>>>
>>> Jayant, Laurent: Do you agree?
>>> If yes, Jayant will you change the patch accordingly?
>>>
>>>
>> Thanks for all the discussion Greg, Michael, Laurent and Alan.
>> Apologies for not responding earlier since I am OOO.
>>
>> While I  haven't tried this out this does seem like a very good idea.
>> Thank you Alan! I will aim to make changes and post a patch on Monday night PST.
> I got caught up with some work which is taking longer than expected. Apologies for the
> delay :) I'm testing some things out right now. I hope to be able to post a patch in the
> next couple of days. Thanks for your patience.

I posted another patch at https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/20231102060120.1159112-1-jchowdhary@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#u.
I've not split this into 2 patches since here, we have a common function that handles both the bulk and isoc
cases and I feel they're logically related. 

Thank you

Jayant