[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20160629.035552.986002707989403517.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 03:55:52 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: timur@...eaurora.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, sdharia@...eaurora.org,
shankerd@...eaurora.org, vikrams@...eaurora.org,
cov@...eaurora.org, gavidov@...eaurora.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
andrew@...n.ch, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, mlangsdo@...hat.com,
jcm@...hat.com, agross@...eaurora.org, f.fainelli@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v6] net: emac: emac gigabit ethernet controller driver
From: Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 18:46:48 -0500
> + while (test_and_set_bit(EMAC_STATUS_RESETTING, &adpt->status))
> + msleep(20); /* Reset might take few 10s of ms */
...
> + while (test_and_set_bit(EMAC_STATUS_RESETTING, &adpt->status))
> + msleep(20); /* Reset might take few 10s of ms */
You cannot spin in the kernel potentially forever if the tested
condition is never met.
Instead you must have some limit for the loop, and signal a failure
if it is reached.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists