linux-mtd.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: Ivan Djelic <ivan.djelic@parrot.com>
Cc: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
	"linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>,
	Jesper Nilsson <jespern@axis.com>,
	Johan Gunnarsson <johan.gunnarsson@axis.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mtd: nand: use hrtimer to measure timeout in nand_wait{_ready, }
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 21:21:26 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1337710886.1977.6.camel@koala> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120522171023.GA2372@parrot.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1075 bytes --]

On Tue, 2012-05-22 at 19:10 +0200, Ivan Djelic wrote:
> Current NAND devices require approximately 1-3 ms per block erase, and 100-200 us per page program operation.
> But I think this timeout is only useful to detect and recover from broken hardware: IMHO there is no point in
> trying to "optimize" the timeout delay to 20ms or 400ms depending on which operation is being done (program or erase).
> 
> Why not simplify and just use a single 1s (1000ms) timeout ?


I have many things on my plate now so my answers are are sloppy - I
spent 1 minute or less looking at the code. But I thought that this
timeout is important for the the case when 'chip->device_ready' is NULL.
This is why I wanted to get rid of that case, and then the timeout would
only become about detecting the forever loops. And this is exactly what
I meant by saying that I have further idea on improving that without
hrtimer - just have one single 1 second timeout. We indeed do not have
to be precise for the errors detection.

Oops, SIGBABY.

-- 
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2012-05-22 18:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-05-21  8:42 [PATCH 0/2] use hrtimer in nand_wait Johan Gunnarsson
2012-05-21  8:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] mtd: nand: panic_nand_wait expects timeout in ms Johan Gunnarsson
2012-05-21  8:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] mtd: nand: use hrtimer to measure timeout in nand_wait{_ready, } Johan Gunnarsson
2012-05-22  7:53   ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-05-22  8:52     ` Johan Gunnarsson
2012-05-22 10:25       ` Artem Bityutskiy
2012-05-22 14:24         ` Johan Gunnarsson
2012-05-22 17:10       ` Ivan Djelic
2012-05-22 18:21         ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
2012-05-23  6:39         ` Brian Norris
2012-05-23  8:36           ` Ivan Djelic
2012-05-23  8:14         ` Johan Gunnarsson
2012-05-22  7:23 ` [PATCH 0/2] use hrtimer in nand_wait Artem Bityutskiy
2012-05-22  8:37   ` Johan Gunnarsson

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=1337710886.1977.6.camel@koala \
    --to=dedekind1@gmail.com \
    --cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
    --cc=ivan.djelic@parrot.com \
    --cc=jespern@axis.com \
    --cc=johan.gunnarsson@axis.com \
    --cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).