On Wed, 2006-02-08 at 18:35 +0100, Michael Buesch wrote:
> Johannes, what is your opinion on that. Does the original driver also
> implement a mutex here?
Not as far as I can see.
johannes
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Joseph Jezak wrote:
Michael Buesch wrote:
The original driver looped 3500 times here, is that enough Larry? I've
changed the specs to reflect this.
On my system, when 1000 fails, 1 still doesn't work as the IRQ_READY will never appear. With my
modification, it hasn't failed in nearly
eout, here.
> >>>I think we should raise it to some very big value. Maybe half a second, or
> >>>even
> >>>a whole second.
> >>>I will apply a mac_suspend fix to my tree.
> >>
> >>I think I have figured out what happens in my "Failed
n see from
the specs.
Im my opinion it is very rude to work without a timeout, here.
I think we should raise it to some very big value. Maybe half a second, or even
a whole second.
I will apply a mac_suspend fix to my tree.
I think I have figured out what happens in my "Failed to suspend mac/X
spend fix to my tree.
>
> I think I have figured out what happens in my "Failed to suspend mac/XMIT
> ERROR" sequence. When I
> increased the loop count from 1000 to 1 where the code spins waiting for
> IRQ_READY to be set, I
I just increased the timeout to 10 lo
meout, here.
I think we should raise it to some very big value. Maybe half a second, or even
a whole second.
I will apply a mac_suspend fix to my tree.
I think I have figured out what happens in my "Failed to suspend mac/XMIT
ERROR" sequence. When I
increased the loop count from 1000 to
