From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBF371FC101; Tue, 12 May 2026 01:27:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778549238; cv=none; b=GJQg4ZGR7n8zXnC5xHTpM804GTMcUGr5KqJ8TUZI7aGk0f4oYckxKPLAbXkscrVd29HMU76WWgrhUTHbX28ufsVuMmRrDU2nmW+3PJwLHiWAcIfhE8C7mPhr7WXkGIZdYtRemhFP/qn/+UjOT33U82j35HLzRGDvX8Qx8b927QE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778549238; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oUJ2ENxBJr/aEbr6dAxLopR+EW9fYBCZYTg0zi3ROzU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Fi9YcpqgLU1CFsbqvaeIv7Id/LFaNAsKMzFKtseg0SLMfsh3QG5Dx9QfiiQs6CgxT5YwBqQPMKYDc844slgEjubqOmaMTchwU96O4rFJ+Pfd7MRrqifZOCVwCym0WTHRRtxEZdfk1nmV9xUR+bvQVr/v5MMkwUTSNhj2y0yHgl0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Et5E7njp; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Et5E7njp" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7266FC2BCB0; Tue, 12 May 2026 01:27:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1778549237; bh=oUJ2ENxBJr/aEbr6dAxLopR+EW9fYBCZYTg0zi3ROzU=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Et5E7njpFt1hBoVQUAa5GjoxpaFgvXaEwveaXxY9WmreGQN673MtFgX1YJLp9kkkm JsWjkH80bM7G83L6Ba1+AHPI7Z2i08iGB1eBdtMk8lcJCSyHNZ0N9FDJ9izCk8Snt4 e69Tnzq1nP9eBBoKR4VxnQehMW+g4KroR0TrBaouS/3LCfHA9zSzE6PDNFsic3bHNP fmx5VoKZxDTa77DwNCv+RNi1ekSTYN1BxVDALBn17Hjoh1YCCrRfQzjHpN5EENwI/+ fbCg/FmCRsOG9ERB5qYIyx2zxCzLWI0Dc9lHddL+TiykMkrtXRjCeGm6JYdwngen/y 6jUQtVe1l+tcA== Received: by finisterre.sirena.org.uk (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6D0E61AC58C2; Tue, 12 May 2026 02:27:15 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 12 May 2026 10:27:15 +0900 From: Mark Brown To: Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Ha=C5=82asa?= Cc: linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Schwierzeck , Hauke Mehrtens Subject: Re: MIPS Lantiq VRX268 general Linux SPI timeout Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-spi@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Ol9mjDSSaJOBAxyd" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: Truckers welcome. --Ol9mjDSSaJOBAxyd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, May 11, 2026 at 05:28:15PM +0200, Krzysztof Ha=C5=82asa wrote: > Now what should we do with this? > a) should we increase the 200 ms timeout? Would it still fail eventually? > b) should the timeout be configurable, maybe by the platform code? > c) some other way? If raising the timeout resolves the issue just raise the timeout, this is not something that should ever happen in production and is just there to ensure we don't completely deadlock on catastrophic errors. --Ol9mjDSSaJOBAxyd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmoCgfIACgkQJNaLcl1U h9BwZgf+PinRTIDJRHuncyCylEpXjckGZz39hA2jyj0fSst6SbujQtnoqkkq9B5L JJgHZZ3b1Tq1EgIhiEI1crEehjgC42Lgn59zEwn+lxCoh1MadT8j+PaGarTlnmNk Xz8TsY6mbUMRBj0DJFeYvIxg+0kItXhPNT+7JIUz2NEhSnsyNM3/SJRrOAC+GD/z iR5MU10UHacmluuvG8rR5LhuYwTIJZcFwZG7aN6A7Luda4m4E6z7jRYEgujx1e/m xVE29dq8ubcT8tWbzf8OYrVHLv8nc1Kd9LZAKdRRl5sILKH9fStmHfu5c6ejYYGg VQYMWw/PNqUQeOH6w3HWkktdtSvtFQ== =DWsv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Ol9mjDSSaJOBAxyd--