[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200915103913.46cebf69@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 10:39:13 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Shannon Nelson <snelson@...sando.io>
Cc: "Keller, Jacob E" <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/2] ionic: add devlink firmware update
On Tue, 15 Sep 2020 10:20:11 -0700 Shannon Nelson wrote:
> >>> What should the userland program do when the timeout expires? Start
> >>> counting backwards? Stop waiting? Do we care to define this at the moment?
> >> [component] bla bla X% (timeout reached)
> >
> > Yep. I don't think userspace should bail or do anything but display
> > here. Basically: the driver will timeout and then end the update
> > process with an error. The timeout value is just a useful display
> > so that users aren't confused why there is no output going on while
> > waiting.
> >
> If individual notify messages have a timeout, how can we have a
> progress-percentage reported with a timeout? This implies to me that
> the timeout is on the component:bla-bla pair, but there are many
> notify messages in order to show the progress in percentage done.
> This is why I was suggesting that if the timeout and component and
> status messages haven't changed, then we're still working on the same
> timeout.
My thinking is that the timeout is mostly useful for commands which
can't meaningfully provide the progress percentage, or the percentage
update is at a very high granularity. If percentage updates are reported
often they should usually be sufficient.
We mostly want to make sure user doesn't think the system has hung.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists