All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Henrik Rydberg" <rydberg@euromail.se>
To: Parag Warudkar <parag.lkml@gmail.com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
	lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	khali@linux-fr.org
Subject: Re: [lm-sensors] [PATCH] applesmc: Bump max wait and rearrange udelay
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 19:46:22 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120917194622.GA308@polaris.bitmath.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120917191416.GA598@polaris.bitmath.org>

> > So bottomline, I suspect we will need to bump to 0x20000 if you want to 
> > keep the current loop termination and udelay().
> 
> That is just crazy, since your code works with a 32ms maximum.

I am sorry, I misread the number of zeroes here. If you are saying
that fours times the current number is enough for the error rate to
drop off on your machine, then I think we should just do that. It is
the only change I can think of that is safe enough at this stage.

Given that the irqsoff latency on a normal machine can be as high as
200 ms or so, it does not seem all that strange.

Thanks,
Henrik

_______________________________________________
lm-sensors mailing list
lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Henrik Rydberg" <rydberg@euromail.se>
To: Parag Warudkar <parag.lkml@gmail.com>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
	lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	khali@linux-fr.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] applesmc: Bump max wait and rearrange udelay
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 21:46:22 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120917194622.GA308@polaris.bitmath.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120917191416.GA598@polaris.bitmath.org>

> > So bottomline, I suspect we will need to bump to 0x20000 if you want to 
> > keep the current loop termination and udelay().
> 
> That is just crazy, since your code works with a 32ms maximum.

I am sorry, I misread the number of zeroes here. If you are saying
that fours times the current number is enough for the error rate to
drop off on your machine, then I think we should just do that. It is
the only change I can think of that is safe enough at this stage.

Given that the irqsoff latency on a normal machine can be as high as
200 ms or so, it does not seem all that strange.

Thanks,
Henrik

  reply	other threads:[~2012-09-17 19:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-09-15 22:42 [lm-sensors] [PATCH] applesmc: Bump max wait and rearrange udelay Parag Warudkar
2012-09-15 22:42 ` Parag Warudkar
2012-09-15 22:58 ` [lm-sensors] " Guenter Roeck
2012-09-15 22:58   ` Guenter Roeck
2012-09-15 23:35   ` [lm-sensors] " Parag Warudkar
2012-09-15 23:35     ` Parag Warudkar
2012-09-15 23:38     ` [lm-sensors] " Parag Warudkar
2012-09-15 23:38       ` Parag Warudkar
2012-09-16  3:29     ` [lm-sensors] " Parag Warudkar
2012-09-16  3:29       ` Parag Warudkar
2012-09-16  4:31       ` [lm-sensors] " Guenter Roeck
2012-09-16  4:31         ` Guenter Roeck
2012-09-16  9:35         ` [lm-sensors] " Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-16  9:35           ` Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-16 21:22           ` [lm-sensors] " Parag Warudkar
2012-09-16 21:22             ` Parag Warudkar
2012-09-16 22:00             ` [lm-sensors] " Guenter Roeck
2012-09-16 22:00               ` Guenter Roeck
2012-09-16 22:30             ` [lm-sensors] " Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-16 22:30               ` Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-17  0:11               ` [lm-sensors] " Parag Warudkar
2012-09-17  0:11                 ` Parag Warudkar
2012-09-17 16:27                 ` [lm-sensors] " Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-17 16:27                   ` Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-17 16:37                   ` [lm-sensors] " Guenter Roeck
2012-09-17 16:37                     ` Guenter Roeck
2012-09-17 20:14                     ` [lm-sensors] " Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-17 20:14                       ` Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-17 22:03                       ` [lm-sensors] " Guenter Roeck
2012-09-17 22:03                         ` Guenter Roeck
2012-09-17 18:06                   ` [lm-sensors] " Parag Warudkar
2012-09-17 18:06                     ` Parag Warudkar
2012-09-17 18:49                     ` [lm-sensors] " Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-17 18:49                       ` Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-17 18:54                       ` [lm-sensors] " Parag Warudkar
2012-09-17 18:54                         ` Parag Warudkar
2012-09-17 19:14                         ` [lm-sensors] " Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-17 19:14                           ` Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-17 19:46                           ` Henrik Rydberg [this message]
2012-09-17 19:46                             ` Henrik Rydberg
2012-09-17 18:22                   ` [lm-sensors] " Parag Warudkar
2012-09-17 18:22                     ` Parag Warudkar
2012-09-17 21:38 ` [lm-sensors] " Parag Warudkar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120917194622.GA308@polaris.bitmath.org \
    --to=rydberg@euromail.se \
    --cc=khali@linux-fr.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
    --cc=lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org \
    --cc=parag.lkml@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.