Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 03/17] powerpc: Add PFO support to the VIO bus | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Tue, 01 May 2012 14:10:44 +1000 |
| |
> 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.
Cheers, Ben.
| |