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 3D16D20C497 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2025 21:44:48 +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=1744839889; cv=none; b=MNOF2HcMq5z56xkapUo09845PWp76bEMxximoZt9Nmb6tyi0W5S9/ftMIbnTg5NySn6FBDju4iJjUf1p9/KMvW3v3zOJs9EE50Zcn/onBKC6C6FsD/HdNqitaUdZdk7L7sFmDXZLLXmAE/zGGdhHrKxgeXa/QTz2rvQEoH/ifEI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1744839889; c=relaxed/simple; bh=01Z2kn5a4gonni9b60GWvMhTbeN4kqMq3u63piqLg1Q=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=hves8p/CZrRESSukRJOtt3JwiLfNHqJhNCM+Nv6PySChRSO+ezZvkEt+oPcE9YxDz7fWJc3Qe1zZ7K6iT91NOvTg4W3A6LtnQjt9RBI6sw7stoQfk14zjPx49bJgCwWXAlcAyEGaFHOC3eZJ5iz+4PEUlSLSNBG1a1ds7TJL7hM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=DKxZCNNv; 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="DKxZCNNv" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6DE46C4CEE2; Wed, 16 Apr 2025 21:44:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1744839888; bh=01Z2kn5a4gonni9b60GWvMhTbeN4kqMq3u63piqLg1Q=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=DKxZCNNvjNEdfRjI5Stq11nKS7wfEfsrj/44rIj5U6PceQjkGHEbp9K9l1nSOF+uJ MnzO6acQ/3zp0mQa9YK56lsxJFJWO+nmIb7C63CHrOq/ITYGwyQyw5qMoQ1vRsaORA Tx3fpNk7vNvhFLfaxuup+83MRutoF87Oa430RttV9MqYotzvdjQBerFxlurxMQpIDZ 3/4vUn7xihAbNHcDXmqKNJ6z72mhOGxgeRNO56MQUHFglWTi+BkhBWtGt1jcpwAPuI qx4cq/cHNCwDdlYfImH1Gg77GSIzDvsDHLFxtH1IGwvNOGqnJfWXUqhTfu4HuihjsI 6MZ7ELefznH0Q== Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 14:44:47 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Michael Chan Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, pavan.chebbi@broadcom.com, andrew.gospodarek@broadcom.com, Kalesh AP Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/4] bnxt_en: Change FW message timeout warning Message-ID: <20250416144447.1fde7ada@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20250415174818.1088646-1-michael.chan@broadcom.com> <20250415174818.1088646-2-michael.chan@broadcom.com> <20250415201444.61303ce7@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 14:41:10 -0700 Michael Chan wrote: > On Tue, Apr 15, 2025 at 8:14=E2=80=AFPM Jakub Kicinski = wrote: >=20 > > sysctl_hung_task_timeout_secs is an exported symbol, and it defaults to= 120. > > Should you not use it in the warning (assuming I understand the intent > > there)? =20 > Yes, we have considered that. This is only printed once at driver > load time, but the sysctl value can be changed at any time after the > driver is loaded. So we just want to use a reasonable value well > below the default sysctl_hung_task_timeout_secs value as the > threshold. >=20 > But we can reference and compare with the > sysctl_hung_task_timeout_secs value if that makes more sense. I see your point. We could also check against CONFIG_DEFAULT_HUNG_TASK_TIMEOUT ? I noticed that some arches set this value really low (10 or 20 sec), it may be worth warning the users in such cases.