From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ben Hutchings Subject: Re: [PATCH] r8169: read MAC address from EEPROM on init Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 11:24:10 +0100 Message-ID: <1222338250.8641.61.camel@achroite> References: <48D25BA2.6070008@redhat.com> <48D3A381.1080500@redhat.com> <48D9FE65.40709@redhat.com> <20080924211021.GB9746@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> <48DB5C04.9050308@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Francois Romieu , Ilpo =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=E4rvinen?= , Netdev , Edward Hsu , Stephen Hemminger To: Ivan Vecera Return-path: Received: from smarthost02.mail.zen.net.uk ([212.23.3.141]:32805 "EHLO smarthost02.mail.zen.net.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753102AbYIYKYV (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Sep 2008 06:24:21 -0400 In-Reply-To: <48DB5C04.9050308@redhat.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2008-09-25 at 11:38 +0200, Ivan Vecera wrote: > Francois Romieu wrote: > > Ivan Vecera : > > [...] > >> OK :-), I hope the patch below is finally the right one. > > > > My approval ratings won't surge today. > > > > Is there a specific explanation for the 10 us delay ? > > > > Realtek's 8168 / 8169 / 8101 drivers all use a (wildly copy'pasted ?) > > 10 ms delay. I would not mind a 10 ms sleep. > 'pci_vpd_pci22_wait' uses 100us(10x10us delay) for reading, there is 1ms > (100x10us delay) in my patch, because 100us max. delay was too little for > Realtek. If the maximum delay there is too short, it should be increased. As I've said before, I picked a timeout that worked for me in the absence of any time limit in the PCI specification. I thought Stephen Hemminger had modified it to work for sky2 but it looks like that change was blocked by quibbling about how best to poll. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.