On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 1:54 AM, Borislav Petkov <b...@amd64.org> wrote:
>> No, it is not what I was saying. I just mean the point is not mentioned in my commit log, but I admit it should be a appropriate cause. > > Ok, maybe I'm not understanding this then. So explain to me this: why > do you need that timeout value of 10, how did we decide it to be 10 If one firmware image was loaded successfully before, the probability of loading it successfully at this time should be much higher than the 1st time because something crazy(for example, the firmware is deleted) happens with low probability. Choosing 10 secs is just a estimation for loading time because the maximum size of firmware in current distributions is about 2M bytes, since we know it has been loaded successfully before. > (and not 20 or 30 or whatever)? Generally, why do we need to reprogram > the timer to a smaller timeout instead of simply doing the completion > without a timeout? No, it should be crazy without a timeout, and it can be triggered in init call easily. Thanks, -- Ming Lei -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
