Hello Remi, Thanks for the new iteration!
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 10:31:42 +0200 Remi Pommarel <r...@triplefau.lt> wrote: > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-aardvark.c > b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-aardvark.c > index fc0fe4d4de49..ee05ccb2b686 100644 > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/pci-aardvark.c > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/pci-aardvark.c > @@ -175,7 +175,8 @@ > (PCIE_CONF_BUS(bus) | PCIE_CONF_DEV(PCI_SLOT(devfn)) | \ > PCIE_CONF_FUNC(PCI_FUNC(devfn)) | PCIE_CONF_REG(where)) > > -#define PIO_TIMEOUT_MS 1 > +#define PIO_RETRY_CNT 10 > +#define PIO_RETRY_DELAY 2 /* 2 us*/ So this changes the timeout from 1ms to just 20us, a division by 50 from the previous timeout value. From my measurements, it could sometime take up to 6us from a single PIO read operation to complete, which is getting close to the 20us timeout. Shouldn't PIO_RETRY_CNT be kept at 500, so that we keep using a 1ms timeout ? Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
