From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <17613.33093.767856.432771@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 14:04:21 +1000 From: Paul Mackerras To: Haren Myneni Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add rtas_set_indicator_fast() for RTAS call without extended delay In-Reply-To: <44C9301C.7080300@us.ibm.com> References: <44C6F521.8040609@us.ibm.com> <20060726220441.GZ19076@localdomain> <44C9301C.7080300@us.ibm.com> Cc: External List , Nathan Lynch , Milton Miller List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Haren Myneni writes: > + WARN_ON(rc == -2 || (rc >= 9900 && rc <= 9905)); This worries me... do we know for sure that RTAS will never return a busy code? If it could possibly return a busy code, and we can't sleep, then we should spin doing the call again and again until it works, I think. Paul.