From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Micha Nelissen Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ipconfig wait for carrier Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 20:52:49 +0200 Message-ID: <4DD56701.8040007@neli.hopto.org> References: <4DD36803.1020001@neli.hopto.org> <20110518.023725.441358922110721042.davem@davemloft.net> <4DD36E54.9040706@neli.hopto.org> <20110518.181427.1228926976939865196.davem@davemloft.net> <1305819120.3271.3.camel@dcbw.foobar.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Dan Williams Return-path: Received: from edu-smtp-02.edutel.nl ([88.159.1.172]:20421 "EHLO edu-smtp-02.edutel.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933792Ab1ESSxY (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 May 2011 14:53:24 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1305819120.3271.3.camel@dcbw.foobar.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Dan Williams wrote: > On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 18:14 -0400, David Miller wrote: >> Please fix ic_is_init_dev() to return a proper boolean "false" instead >> of "0" when IFF_LOOPBACK is set. Ok. Had an int before, but boolean is better. > Shouldn't the code still wait at *least* one second? Not all drivers > support carrier detect, and those that don't set the carrier always-on. > Thus older devices that used to have 1s to get carrier in line (even if > they don't report it) now have only 10ms. > > I think it should wait at least one second like the code currently does, > and then if the carrier still isn't up, wait longer. What is the 1 second based on? If a driver does not support carrier detect, then this code will wait for the timeout period. Or do those older drivers set carrier detect immediately when device is probed? Micha