On Tue, 2016-03-29 at 08:51 -0700, Tyrel Datwyler wrote: > On 03/28/2016 07:51 PM, Russell Currey wrote: > > + /* > > + * RTAS can return a delay value of up to 10^5 > > milliseconds > > + * (RTAS_EXTENDED_DELAY_MAX), which is too long. Only > > respect > > + * the delay if it's 100ms or less. > > + */ > Your changelog says the delay is capped at 0.2s. However, your comment > in the code mentions the full 10^5ms based on the 9900-9905 codes. It > would probably be best to expand you comment to mention in the code that > you are only handling 9900-9902 to eliminate the confusion of looking at > the above comment vs below implementation. > > Further, despite PAPRs software note that the long busy should be > limited to 9900-9902 you might want to add a catch to your switch to log > any unexpected 9903-9905 or just treat them as max 0.2s delay. Firmware > has been know to do things on occasion that the spec says it shouldn't, > and it might not be obvious at first should you receive one of the > longer delay codes why we are going down the error path. > > -Tyrel
Good to know, thanks. I'll respin. - Russell _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
