Hi,
checking some patches thru www.kernel.org
I noticed in
/drivers/net/igb/e1000_mbx.c
in function
static s32 igb_poll_for_msg(struct e1000_hw *hw, u16 mbx_id)
{
struct e1000_mbx_info *mbx = &hw->mbx;
int countdown = mbx->timeout;
if (!mbx->ops.check_for_msg)
goto out;
while (mbx->ops.check_for_msg(hw, mbx_id)) {
if (!countdown)
break;
countdown--;
udelay(mbx->usec_delay);
}
out:
return countdown ? 0 : -E1000_ERR_MBX;
}
that when while loop has been executed
mbx->timeout times, countdown is now 0
and last while test (mbx->ops.check_for_msg(hw, mbx_id)) is done. Regardles of
the test result, -E1000_ERR_MBX is returned
from the function, because contdown is 0.
Should 0 be returned if the last possible (after mbx->timeout udelays)
mbx->ops.check_for_msg(hw, mbx_id) is a success?
What if mbx->timeout is 0, should mbx->ops.check_for_msg(hw, mbx_id) result be
honoured? Or might mbx->timeout == 0
be a special case, returning -E1000_ERR_MBX anyway?
Same situation in function
static s32 igb_poll_for_ack(struct e1000_hw *hw, u16 mbx_id)
If you reply to this message,
please put the Subject of your reply as "Timeout",
or my spam filter will eat your reply.
Reported-by: "Juha Leppanen" <juha_motorsport...@luukku.com>
tag would be nice in kernel.org :)
Not so many kernel hackers give credit these days :(
Happy hacking,
Mr. Juha Leppanen
Kuopio, Finland
...................................................................
Luukku Plus paketilla pääset eroon tila- ja turvallisuusongelmista.
Hanki Luukku Plus ja helpotat elämääsi. http://www.mtv3.fi/luukku
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment.
Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel
