[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <676085a7.050a0220.1e6031.2193@mx.google.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2024 20:55:13 +0100
From: Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: qca8k: Fix inconsistent use of
jiffies vs milliseconds
On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 10:21:12AM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 01:13:34AM +0200, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 15, 2024 at 05:43:55PM +0000, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> > > wait_for_complete_timeout() expects a timeout in jiffies. With the
> > > driver, some call sites converted QCA8K_ETHERNET_TIMEOUT to jiffies,
> > > others did not. Make the code consistent by changes the #define to
> > > include a call to msecs_to_jiffies, and remove all other calls to
> > > msecs_to_jiffies.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
> > > ---
> >
> > If my calculations are correct, for CONFIG_HZ=100, 5 jiffies last 50 ms.
> > So, assuming that configuration, the patch would be _decreasing_ the timeout
> > from 50 ms to 5 ms. The change should be tested to confirm it's enough.
> > Christian, could you do that?
>
> I've have an qca8k system now, and have tested this patch. However, a
> Tested-by: from Christian would be very welcome.
>
Hi need 1-2 days to test this, hope that is O.K.
--
Ansuel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists