From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932434Ab2IQSGR (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Sep 2012 14:06:17 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.213.46]:38400 "EHLO mail-yw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753971Ab2IQSGP (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Sep 2012 14:06:15 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 14:06:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Parag Warudkar X-X-Sender: parag@ubuntu To: Henrik Rydberg cc: Parag Warudkar , Guenter Roeck , lm-sensors@lm-sensors.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, khali@linux-fr.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] applesmc: Bump max wait and rearrange udelay In-Reply-To: <20120917162705.GA2854@polaris.bitmath.org> Message-ID: References: <20120915225841.GA3816@roeck-us.net> <20120916043116.GA4477@roeck-us.net> <20120916093520.GA5623@polaris.bitmath.org> <20120916223003.GA2160@polaris.bitmath.org> <20120917162705.GA2854@polaris.bitmath.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 17 Sep 2012, Henrik Rydberg wrote: > The current patch does exactly the same sleeps, the only difference is > that the test is also done before the first sleep. Thus, the increased > delay, if any, comes from the sleep range. My understanding is that the original patch resulted in trying a max udelay(16). The new one does usleep_range(16, 32). That's a minimum 16 max 32 - so the fact that it stops read failures means the added delay is present and does help. > > > The MBP10,1 experiences a lot of write errors with this patch. Well the send_byte changes are not necessary for fixing my problem - I only converted it because of usleep_range() primarily. What happens if you drop the send_byte() part of the patch and test with only the wait_read() changes? I would be very surprised if that caused write or read failures. Parag