[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2016 00:19:29 +0200
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Daniel Wagner <wagi@...om.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"rafael.j.wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>,
Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@...-carit.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/5] firmware: encapsulate firmware loading status
On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 02:12:21PM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> +#else /* CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER */
> +
> +#define fw_umh_wait_timeout(fw_st, long) 0
> +
> +#define fw_umh_done(fw_st)
> +#define fw_umh_is_done(fw_st) true
> +#define fw_umh_is_aborted(fw_st) false
> +
If we do proceed with compartmentalizing the UMH timeout crap
then my hope is this piece of code will not require the
fw_umh_wait_timeout() def.
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists