[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aa9f58f6-054e-4fb4-8cb7-01ea88d7f483@163.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2025 23:54:27 +0800
From: Hans Zhang <18255117159@....com>
To: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>, Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc: bhelgaas@...gle.com, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] PCI: pciehp: Add macros for hotplug operation
delays
On 2025/11/4 01:24, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 03, 2025 at 09:37:34AM -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 02, 2025 at 12:05:37AM +0800, Hans Zhang wrote:
>>> Add WAIT_PDS_TIMEOUT_MS and POLL_CMD_TIMEOUT_MS macros for hotplug
>>> operation delays to improve code readability.
> [...]
>>> +++ b/drivers/pci/hotplug/pciehp_hpc.c
>>> @@ -28,6 +28,9 @@
>>> #include "../pci.h"
>>> #include "pciehp.h"
>>>
>>> +#define WAIT_PDS_TIMEOUT_MS 10
>>> +#define POLL_CMD_TIMEOUT_MS 10
>>> +
>>> static const struct dmi_system_id inband_presence_disabled_dmi_table[] = {
>>> /*
>>> * Match all Dell systems, as some Dell systems have inband
>>> @@ -103,7 +106,7 @@ static int pcie_poll_cmd(struct controller *ctrl, int timeout)
>>> smp_mb();
>>> return 1;
>>> }
>>> - msleep(10);
>>> + msleep(POLL_CMD_TIMEOUT_MS);
>>
>> Lukas might have different opinions and I would defer to him here.
>>
>> But IMO (a) these aren't timeouts, they are poll intervals, (b) the
>> values are arbitrary with no connection to a spec, so less reason for
>> a #define, and (c) the #defines don't improve readability because now
>> I have to look at two places to understand the poll loops.
>
> I agree on all counts.
>
Hi Bjorn,
Please drop this patch.
Best regards,
Hans
> Thanks,
>
> Lukas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists