Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 3 Nov 2021 12:07:45 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     "Chen, Conghui" <conghui.chen@intel.com>
Cc:     "Deng, Jie" <jie.deng@intel.com>,
        Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@axis.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>,
        "virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org" 
        <virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
        "linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        kernel <kernel@axis.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] i2c: virtio: disable timeout handling
Message-ID: <20211103063745.utpphthou4angs4s@vireshk-i7>
References: <YW+q1yQ8MuhHINAs@kroah.com>
 <8e182ea8-5016-fa78-3d77-eefba7d58612@intel.com>
 <20211020064128.y2bjsbdmpojn7pjo@vireshk-i7>
 <01d9c992-28cc-6644-1e82-929fc46f91b4@intel.com>
 <20211020105554.GB9985@axis.com>
 <20211020110316.4x7tnxonswjuuoiw@vireshk-i7>
 <df7e6127-05fb-6aad-3896-fc810f213a54@intel.com>
 <20211029122450.GB24060@axis.com>
 <8592a48d-0131-86bf-586a-d33e7989e523@intel.com>
 <MWHPR11MB0030C3489F38FF2AAF7C3D0A908C9@MWHPR11MB0030.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <MWHPR11MB0030C3489F38FF2AAF7C3D0A908C9@MWHPR11MB0030.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52
Precedence: bulk

On 03-11-21, 06:18, Chen, Conghui wrote:
> >>> Over the long term, I think the backend should provide that timeout
> >>> value and guarantee that its processing time should not exceed that
> >>> value.
> >> If you mean that the spec should be changed to allow the virtio driver
> >> to be able to program a certain timeout for I2C transactions in the
> >> virtio device, yes, that does sound reasonable.
> >
> >
> >Due to changes in my work, I will pass my virtio-i2c maintenance to Conghui.
> >
> >She may work on this in the future.
> >
> 
> I'll try to update the spec first.

I don't think the spec should be changed for timeout. Timeout-interval
here isn't the property of just the host firmware/kernel, but the
entire setup plays a role here.

Host have its own timeframe to take care of things (I think HZ should
really be enough for that, since kernel can manage it for busses
normally with just that). Then comes the virtualization, context
switches, guest OS, backend, etc, which add to this delay. All this is
not part of the virtio protocol and so shouldn't be made part of it.

-- 
viresh