On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 02:42:17PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: >On Thu, 2013-06-13 at 12:26 +0800, Gavin Shan wrote: >> So the answer is we can do it by makeing the assumption that f/w won't >> return valid delay and we're going to use default value (1 second) for >> guest on powernv or phyp, or we keep the delay here. > >Ok, at the very least then change the name to "unavailable_delay" or >something explicit like that then :-) >
Ok. >BTW. I've already applied patches 1 and 2 to my tree, you don't have to >resend those. They'll show up today or tomorrow when I push my next >branch out. > Ok. Thanks, Ben. Thanks, Gavin _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
