On Sun, 2014-02-09 at 13:50 +0100, Oliver Schinagl wrote:
> On 02/07/14 17:15, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > -#define WAIT_MS_LINKUP 4
> > +#define WAIT_MS_LINKUP 40
> wont this affect every platform?
Yes. I figured that since this was a timeout it was pretty harmless to
increase it, the only downside seems to be that if the AHCI is actually
broken you wait a bit longer before figuring that out.
Although I didn't find a good reference 4ms did seem short compared with
what I think Linux was doing (but it's all a bit async as well as
abstracted into common infra there so I may not be following it
correctly) and what other google'd up bits and bobs showed -- they seems
to be more in the 100-150ms range.
> I don't know what u-boot's rules are
> with regards to that, as it will come as 'a' patch in a big series when
> we upstream it ...
I was a bit torn over what to do with this and the first patch ("Provide
a weak scsi_init hook") since they are both essentially upstream fodder
already _except_ that they wouldn't be being presented at the same time
as a consumer of the change.
I have a feeling that for upstreaming these sorts of changes might need
to be cherry-picked into their own changeset, the massive patch approach
doesn't seem likely to succeed even if it only touches sunxi code, but
including random changes to the common code in that patch is sure to
fail IMHO. I was looking at the mainline vs sunxi diff and there are a
few other similar changes which would need pulling out too.
> oliver
>
> P.S. Awesome job :D and was nice to meet you! even though it was very
> briefly.
Likewise!
> >
> > static inline u32 ahci_port_base(u32 base, u32 port)
> > {
> >
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"linux-sunxi" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
