From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1758798AbbIVR3v (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:29:51 -0400
Received: from mezzanine.sirena.org.uk ([106.187.55.193]:46283 "EHLO
	mezzanine.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1758108AbbIVR3t (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:29:49 -0400
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 10:29:19 -0700
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Jean-Michel Hautbois <jean-michel.hautbois@veo-labs.com>
Cc: linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Message-ID: <20150922172919.GK30445@sirena.org.uk>
References: <CAH-u=81E2RnMvm2UZxUasCSf6hMQtiMO9Y1VcNiy0pFR6Uy6vg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150919175614.GM30445@sirena.org.uk>
 <CAH-u=816w-uGmWt-sf2AqahRL2j7RBCah8JAKOCXFFnvVdMzhw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="CzAS06hjyJnpEZQC"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAH-u=816w-uGmWt-sf2AqahRL2j7RBCah8JAKOCXFFnvVdMzhw@mail.gmail.com>
X-Cookie: NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 70.35.39.2
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk
Subject: Re: spi-imx: wait_for_completion should timeout even in non-DMA
 transfer cases
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:24:06 +0000)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on mezzanine.sirena.org.uk)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


--CzAS06hjyJnpEZQC
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 11:08:55AM +0200, Jean-Michel Hautbois wrote:
> 2015-09-19 19:56 GMT+02:00 Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>:

> > A calculated timeout is probably best.

> Well, it depends...
> If you have a 20MHz clock, then you can transfer a byte in 4=B5s.
> As most of the time pio_transfer is used for 8 to 32 bytes max, it
> would be irrelevant to use such a small timeout.
> I can obviously do it, but not sure if using a small (say, 100ms)
> timeout would not be better.

You want a minimum threashold, yes, but you also need to be able toc ope
with larger transfers too so need to be able to raise that where
appropriate.

--CzAS06hjyJnpEZQC
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWAY/qAAoJECTWi3JdVIfQ4HUH/2je3NMXhOip9ivAPoLICqx0
qDYlzUqrc8gS27d5Y/Zv75PZo4eFmmjxM0S4L72rj2uXSP2tBb82XW1OHDuEjx8Q
Iedb3JW7VP8YVJvLGaXQKD3BgOJGfmgyXh/NVUJcF6ePA6ahKnrMgmPf2cepe5i9
vhKOGvrfDP7RI+qlqSjEwUVKnoM2i+YVS8AES+mGAud+HzXaSNAU3CUcIwo1eMCK
C2JBXPHab2VjhG/oBAFwszP2PvMqTQTubPu9hiWXcS86u80GH7tudimjN0gaYPo1
ebazBS78Q3DYhcAFCYo3fSGXsWEi16ghRVKcYQ5IvW0CRTe7TOvzBKbSccmJCxA=
=9hDZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--CzAS06hjyJnpEZQC--