[lkml]   [2012]   [May]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 03/17] powerpc: Add PFO support to the VIO bus

    > Else, what about ceding the processor ? Or at the very least reducing
    > the thread priority for a bit ?
    > Shouldn't we also enforce to always have a timeout ? IE. Something like
    > 30s or so if nothing specified to avoid having the kernel just hard
    > lock...
    > In general I don't like that sort of synchronous code, I'd rather return
    > the busy status up the chain which gives a chance to the caller to take
    > more appropriate measures depending on what it's doing, but that really
    > depends what you use that synchronous call for. I suppose if it's for
    > configuration type operations, it's ok...

    In any case, don't resend the whole series, just that one patch.


     \ /
      Last update: 2012-05-01 07:21    [W:0.020 / U:3.644 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site