On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 04:13:46PM +1100, Gavin Shan wrote:

On Mon, Mar 09, 2015 at 11:17:31AM +0800, Wei Yang wrote:

quoted

As the comment indicates, powernv_eeh_get_state() will inform EEH core to
delay 1 second. This means the delay doesn't happen when
powernv_eeh_get_state() returns.

This patch moves the delay subtraction just before msleep(), which is the
same logic in pseries_eeh_wait_state().

Signed-off-by: Wei Yang <redacted>

The patch would conflict with the patches to remove EEH chip layer done
in https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/439956/. Could you please repost
with corrected function names in commit log when the dependent patches
show up in Michael's next branch?

Except that, the changes look ok to me:

Acked-by: Gavin Shan <redacted>

Thanks, I will repost it accordingly.

Thanks,
Gavin

quoted

---
arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/eeh-powernv.c |    2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/eeh-powernv.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/eeh-powernv.c
index 5abb4c2..af1be8f 100644
--- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/eeh-powernv.c
+++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/powernv/eeh-powernv.c

@@ -334,13 +334,13 @@ static int powernv_eeh_wait_state(struct eeh_pe *pe, int max_wait)

		if (ret != EEH_STATE_UNAVAILABLE)
			return ret;

-		max_wait -= mwait;
		if (max_wait <= 0) {
			pr_warn("%s: Timeout getting PE#%x's state (%d)\n",
				__func__, pe->addr, max_wait);
			return EEH_STATE_NOT_SUPPORT;
		}

+		max_wait -= mwait;
		msleep(mwait);
	}

-- 
1.7.9.5

-- 
Richard Yang
Help you, Help me