[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AE90C24D6B3A694183C094C60CF0A2F6026B7221@saturn3.aculab.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 15:37:41 +0100
From: "David Laight" <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: "Somnath Kotur" <somnath.kotur@...lex.com>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: <davem@...emloft.net>, "Kalesh AP" <kalesh.purayil@...lex.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net 1/3] be2net: Fix firmware download for Lancer
> Increasing the timeout value of write_object command to 60 seconds as
> 30 second timeout was found to be not enough for the command to complete.
...
> if (!wait_for_completion_timeout(&adapter->flash_compl,
> - msecs_to_jiffies(30000)))
> + msecs_to_jiffies(60000)))
If an operation is likely to take over 30 seconds I'd expect
the 'guard timer' to be much longer than 60 seconds.
OTOH if an ioctl() call (or similar) into a driver is going
to sleep for that long users are going to start getting worried.
I'm not sure what the answer is, but some kind of confirmation
that the operation is proceeding would be more useful.
I presume that the time is taken doing flash sector erases
and writes? 30 seconds is still a lot of flash erases.
Perhaps the flash code could decrement a counter and wake the
user process every time it finishes a sector. The application
could then report progress - and the timeout would only need
to be long enough for a single sector erase/write.
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists