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:   Tue, 9 Nov 2021 10:22:21 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@axis.com>
Cc:     "Chen, Conghui" <conghui.chen@intel.com>,
        "Deng, Jie" <jie.deng@intel.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: <20211109045221.xd6apt473jannag2@vireshk-i7>
References: <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>
 <20211103063745.utpphthou4angs4s@vireshk-i7>
 <20211103144241.GA27285@axis.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20211103144241.GA27285@axis.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52
Precedence: bulk

On 03-11-21, 15:42, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
> The suggested timeout is not meant to take into account the overhead of
> virtualization, but to be used by the virtio device as a timeout for the
> transaction on the I2C bus (presumably by programming this value to the
> physical I2C controller, if one exists).
> 
> Assume that userspace (or an I2C client driver) asks for a timeout of 20
> ms for a particular transfer because it, say, knows that the particular
> connected I2C peripheral either responds within 10 ms to a particular
> register read or never responds, so it doesn't want to waste time
> waiting unnecessarily long for the transfer to complete.
> 
> If the virtio device end does not have any information on what timeout
> is required (as in the current spec), it must assume some high value
> which will never cause I2C transactions to spuriously timeout, say 10
> seconds.  
>
> Even if the virtio driver is fixed to copy and hold all buffers to avoid
> memory corruption and to time out and return to the caller after the
> requested 20 ms, the next I2C transfer can not be issued until 10
> seconds have passed, since the virtio device end will still be waiting
> for the hardcoded 10 second timeout and may not respond to new requests
> until that transfer has timed out.

Okay, so this is more about making sure the device times-out before
the driver or lets say in an expected time-frame. That should be okay
I guess.

-- 
viresh