public inbox for linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Singh, Balbir" <sblbir@amazon.com>
To: "hch@lst.de" <hch@lst.de>, "sblbir@amzn.com" <sblbir@amzn.com>
Cc: "kbusch@kernel.org" <kbusch@kernel.org>,
	"axboe@fb.com" <axboe@fb.com>,
	"sagi@grimberg.me" <sagi@grimberg.me>,
	"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] nvme/host/core: Allow overriding of wait_ready timeout
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2019 12:33:31 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c51a4ac0b974e6efbd4f9d67adc8a70ae94ac325.camel@amazon.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190916074153.GA25606@lst.de>

On Mon, 2019-09-16 at 09:41 +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 11:36:31PM +0000, Balbir Singh wrote:
> > +unsigned int nvme_wait_ready_timeout = 0;
> > +module_param_named(wait_ready_timeout, nvme_wait_ready_timeout,
> > uint, 0644);
> > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(wait_ready_timeout, "timeout in seconds for wait
> > ready on reset");
> 
> This is only used in core.c, so it can be marked static.
> 
> Also it introduces a > 80 char line.

I'll fix that, I must revisit my checkpatch results.

> 
> > +
> >  static unsigned char shutdown_timeout = 5;
> >  module_param(shutdown_timeout, byte, 0644);
> >  MODULE_PARM_DESC(shutdown_timeout, "timeout in seconds for
> > controller shutdown");
> > @@ -1938,6 +1942,9 @@ static int nvme_wait_ready(struct nvme_ctrl
> > *ctrl, u64 cap, bool enabled)
> >  	u32 csts, bit = enabled ? NVME_CSTS_RDY : 0;
> >  	int ret;
> >  
> > +	if (nvme_wait_ready_timeout)
> > +		timeout = NVME_WAIT_READY_TIMEOUT + jiffies;
> 
> I'm not sure the NVME_WAIT_READY_TIMEOUT #define really helps much
> here.
> Also the code is a little confusing as as, why not and if / else with
> the normal timeout definition?

I could refactor the patch

> 
> Then again I'm not even sure we really want this.  The debugging use
> case is somethign where you can easily hack a line in the driver, and
> we really don't want normal users to mess with a random parameter
> like
> this one.

The reason I sent this out is that I've seen some controllers setting
this to max value. I suspect there is no good way for the controller
to set wait ready values either. In any case 128 seconds for a failure
seems a bit too much, specially if the controller does not respond on
boot and hence the debug option. I don't expect it to be used by normal
users on most of their systems

Balbir Singh.

_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme

  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-16 12:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-13 23:36 [PATCH v2 1/2] nvme/host/pci: Fix a race in controller removal Balbir Singh
2019-09-13 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] nvme/host/core: Allow overriding of wait_ready timeout Balbir Singh
2019-09-16  7:41   ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-09-16 12:33     ` Singh, Balbir [this message]
2019-09-16 16:01       ` hch
2019-09-16 21:04         ` Singh, Balbir
2019-09-17  1:14           ` Keith Busch
2019-09-17  2:56             ` Singh, Balbir
2019-09-17  3:17               ` Bart Van Assche
2019-09-17  5:02                 ` Singh, Balbir
2019-09-17 17:21                 ` James Smart
2019-09-17 20:08                   ` James Smart
2019-09-17  3:54               ` Keith Busch
2019-09-16  7:49 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] nvme/host/pci: Fix a race in controller removal Christoph Hellwig
2019-09-16 12:07   ` Singh, Balbir
2019-09-16 15:40 ` Bart Van Assche
2019-09-16 19:38   ` Singh, Balbir
2019-09-16 19:56     ` Bart Van Assche
2019-09-16 20:40       ` Singh, Balbir
2019-09-17 17:55         ` Bart Van Assche
2019-09-17 20:30           ` Keith Busch
2019-09-17 20:44           ` Singh, Balbir
2019-09-16 20:07     ` Keith Busch

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=c51a4ac0b974e6efbd4f9d67adc8a70ae94ac325.camel@amazon.com \
    --to=sblbir@amazon.com \
    --cc=axboe@fb.com \
    --cc=hch@lst.de \
    --cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
    --cc=sblbir@amzn.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox