From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>
To: Daniel Wagner <wagi@monom.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@canonical.com>,
"Luis R . Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] firmware_class: encapsulate firmware loading status
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 19:50:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160825175007.GA3296@wotan.suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1472118723-22762-2-git-send-email-wagi@monom.org>
On Thu, Aug 25, 2016 at 11:52:01AM +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> index 22d1760..f397026 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> @@ -91,10 +91,13 @@ static inline bool fw_is_builtin_firmware(const struct firmware *fw)
> }
> #endif
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER
> +
> enum {
> + FW_STATUS_UNKNOWN,
> FW_STATUS_LOADING,
> FW_STATUS_DONE,
> - FW_STATUS_ABORT,
> + FW_STATUS_ABORTED,
> };
>
> static int loading_timeout = 60; /* In seconds */
<-- snip -->
> +#else /* CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER */
> +
> +static int loading_timeout = 60;
> +#define firmware_loading_timeout() (loading_timeout * HZ)
> +
> +#define fw_status_wait_timeout(fw_st, long) 0
The timeout makes 0 sense for when !CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER so can
we do away with adding a silly 60 value to an int here and
the silly value of (loading_timeout * HZ) ? Its not used so its not
clear to me why this is here.
Luis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-25 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-25 9:52 [PATCH v3 0/3] " Daniel Wagner
2016-08-25 9:52 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] " Daniel Wagner
2016-08-25 17:50 ` Luis R. Rodriguez [this message]
2016-08-29 9:50 ` Daniel Wagner
2016-08-29 14:18 ` Daniel Wagner
2016-08-30 19:34 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2016-08-31 7:13 ` Daniel Wagner
2016-09-07 0:30 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2016-08-25 9:52 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] firmware_class: Drop bit ops in favor of simple state machine Daniel Wagner
2016-08-25 9:52 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] firmware_class: Do not use fw_lock for fw_status protection Daniel Wagner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160825175007.GA3296@wotan.suse.de \
--to=mcgrof@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@canonical.com \
--cc=wagi@monom.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®