From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932124Ab1FGV27 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2011 17:28:59 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:37658 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932074Ab1FGV26 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jun 2011 17:28:58 -0400 Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2011 14:28:00 -0700 From: Greg KH To: KY Srinivasan Cc: Greg KH , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devel@linuxdriverproject.org" , "virtualization@lists.osdl.org" , Haiyang Zhang , "Abhishek Kane (Mindtree Consulting PVT LTD)" Subject: Re: [PATCH 49/49] Staging: hv: vmbus: Increase the timeout value in vmbus_request_offers() Message-ID: <20110607212800.GA3331@suse.de> References: <1307400540-13193-1-git-send-email-kys@microsoft.com> <1307400613-13234-1-git-send-email-kys@microsoft.com> <1307400613-13234-49-git-send-email-kys@microsoft.com> <20110607204514.GB16429@kroah.com> <6E21E5352C11B742B20C142EB499E0480813DC6F@TK5EX14MBXC122.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6E21E5352C11B742B20C142EB499E0480813DC6F@TK5EX14MBXC122.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 09:20:16PM +0000, KY Srinivasan wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Greg KH [mailto:greg@kroah.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 4:45 PM > > To: KY Srinivasan > > Cc: gregkh@suse.de; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > > devel@linuxdriverproject.org; virtualization@lists.osdl.org; Haiyang Zhang; > > Abhishek Kane (Mindtree Consulting PVT LTD) > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 49/49] Staging: hv: vmbus: Increase the timeout value in > > vmbus_request_offers() > > > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 03:50:13PM -0700, K. Y. Srinivasan wrote: > > > Increase the timeout value in vmbus_request_offers(). > > > > Why? What does this solve/fix/prevent? > > On some very loaded systems, when we tested the 1 second timeout that > we had prior to this patch was insufficient. So I bumped it to 5 seconds. Ok, then this should be something that goes into 3.0 and older kernels, right? If so, please say so, with this type of description, when you submit it. Remember, don't say only what you did in the changelog comment, but why you did it if it's not obvious (and it wasn't here.) Care to resend this one with this information? thanks, greg k-h