Linux PCI subsystem development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
To: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>
Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@meta.com>,
	bhelgaas@google.com, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci: allow user specifiy a reset wait timeout
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 08:32:03 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z6ob8zU52N5IkfHf@kbusch-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z6oYKnX9HHPDoCU2@wunner.de>

On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 04:15:54PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 07:59:01AM -0700, Keith Busch wrote:
> > My concern with quirking it is that we'd have to settle on what we think
> > is the worst case timeout, then it becomes compiled into that kernel for
> > that device. The devices I'm dealing with are actively under
> > development, and the time to ready gets bigger or smaller as updates
> > occur, or some new worst case scenario is discovered. Making this a boot
> > time decicion really helps with experimentation here.
> 
> I understand, but honestly this doesn't sound like something which
> needs to be in the upstream kernel.  If it's for experimentation only,
> I'd keep it in the downstream kernel used for experimentation
> and if it turns out that 60 sec is insufficient for the final
> production device, I'd submit a quirk for that.

It's always a pain to carry out of tree patches. These might be devices
having active development, but they are used in production and the
systems they're in follow the standard kernel updates. And before this
generation of devices even settles on an appropriate quirk timeout might
require (if that ever happens), I have the next generations to deal
with, so this need isn't going to go away. Carrying such an out of tree
patch for eternity sounds unpleasant.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-02-10 15:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-02-07 20:43 [PATCH] pci: allow user specifiy a reset wait timeout Keith Busch
2025-02-08  4:50 ` Lukas Wunner
2025-02-10 14:59   ` Keith Busch
2025-02-10 15:15     ` Lukas Wunner
2025-02-10 15:32       ` Keith Busch [this message]
2025-02-13 13:37 ` Ilpo Järvinen

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=Z6ob8zU52N5IkfHf@kbusch-mbp \
    --to=kbusch@kernel.org \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=kbusch@meta.com \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lukas@wunner.de \
    /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