From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: barebox@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Andrey Smirnov <andrew.smirnov@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 11/6] net/e1000: expand timeout for flash erasure
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 12:12:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20171123111237.10245-5-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171123111237.10245-1-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Erasing the whole flash takes approximately 7s on one of my test
machines. Expand the timeout accordingly.
Note however that it is in general not allowed to hold the flash
semaphore for so long and "firmware might implement a timeout
mechanism and take ownership of the relevant [lock]" after one second.
So a chip erase should better only be done when firmware doesn't make
use of the flash.
Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
---
drivers/net/e1000/eeprom.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/e1000/eeprom.c b/drivers/net/e1000/eeprom.c
index 0d91a88bd74f..0f1305c8499b 100644
--- a/drivers/net/e1000/eeprom.c
+++ b/drivers/net/e1000/eeprom.c
@@ -854,7 +854,7 @@ static int e1000_flash_mode_erase_chunk(struct e1000_hw *hw, loff_t offset,
ret = e1000_poll_reg(hw, E1000_FLSWCTL,
E1000_FLSWCTL_DONE | E1000_FLSWCTL_FLBUSY,
E1000_FLSWCTL_DONE,
- SECOND);
+ 10 * SECOND);
if (ret < 0) {
dev_err(hw->dev,
"Timeout waiting for FLSWCTL.DONE to be set (erase)\n");
--
2.11.0
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-23 11:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-11-22 10:22 [PATCH 0/6] net/e1000: more cleanups and ways to access i210 storage Uwe Kleine-König
2017-11-22 10:22 ` [PATCH 1/6] net/e1000: fix coding style at a few locations Uwe Kleine-König
2017-11-22 10:22 ` [PATCH 2/6] net/e1000: don't use the eeprom word size as timeout to get a semaphore Uwe Kleine-König
2017-11-22 10:22 ` [PATCH 3/6] net/e1000: reorder functions Uwe Kleine-König
2017-11-22 10:22 ` [PATCH 4/6] net/e1000: provide access to iNVM even if a flash is present Uwe Kleine-König
2017-11-22 10:22 ` [PATCH 5/6] net/e1000: fix size of invm device Uwe Kleine-König
2017-11-22 10:22 ` [PATCH 6/6] net/e1000: provide device for accessing emulated eeprom Uwe Kleine-König
2017-11-23 11:12 ` [PATCH 7/6] net/e1000: don't fail to bind on uninitialized flash Uwe Kleine-König
2017-11-23 11:12 ` [PATCH 8/6] net/e1000: log flash/invm status at probe time Uwe Kleine-König
2017-11-23 11:12 ` [PATCH 9/6] net/e1000: don't access the (simulated) eeprom when it is invalid Uwe Kleine-König
2017-11-23 11:12 ` [PATCH 10/6] net/e1000: indicate in error messages where the failure occured Uwe Kleine-König
2017-11-23 11:12 ` Uwe Kleine-König [this message]
2017-11-24 9:06 ` [PATCH 0/6] net/e1000: more cleanups and ways to access i210 storage Sascha Hauer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20171123111237.10245-5-u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
--to=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
--cc=andrew.smirnov@gmail.com \
--cc=barebox@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox