From:   "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
To:     Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>,
        Khadija Kamran <kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com>
Cc:     outreachy@lists.linux.dev,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: axis-fifo: initialize timeouts in probe only
Date:   Wed, 15 Mar 2023 14:34:31 +0100
Message-ID: <16148020.1MiD057Pog@suse>
In-Reply-To: <ZBG699SriXWy1I2K@khadija-virtual-machine>
References: <ZA9mThZ7NyRrQAMX@khadija-virtual-machine> <ZBEJ+8DbhADSBTLr@aschofie-mobl2>
 <ZBG699SriXWy1I2K@khadija-virtual-machine>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Precedence: bulk

On mercoled=EC 15 marzo 2023 13:32:55 CET Khadija Kamran wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 04:57:47PM -0700, Alison Schofield wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 10:31:21PM +0100, Fabio wrote:
> > > On marted=EC 14 marzo 2023 21:43:40 CET Alison Schofield wrote:
> > > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 11:07:10PM +0500, Khadija Kamran wrote:
> > > > > Module parameter, read_timeout, can only be set at the loading ti=
me.
> > > > > As
> > > > > it can only be modified once, initialize read_timeout once in the
> > > > > probe
> > > > > function.
> > > > > As a result, only use read_timeout as the last argument in
> > > > > wait_event_interruptible_timeout() call.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Same goes for write_timeout.
> > > > >=20
> > > > > Suggested-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Khadija Kamran <kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > >=20
> > > > Looks like this is [PATCH v5] and needs a changelog.
> > >=20
> > > Alison,
> > >=20
> > > In fact, this is only the second patch that addresses Greg's suggested
> > > refactoring.
> > >=20
> > > Khadija moved from v3 of "staging: axis-fifo: remove tabs to align
> > > arguments"
> > > to v4 of this completely independent patch. And then back to v1, beca=
use
> > > (at
> > > the time of v4) I pointed out to her that she had started working on a
> > > project that has a completely different purpose than the previous one.
> > >=20
> > > The best course of action would have been to ask Greg to drop the=20
previous
> > > patches and then reset the numbering of the new job to v1. Unfortunat=
ely=20
I
> > > did not pay attention to how she then managed the numbering following=
 my
> > > observation.
> > >=20
> > > What would be the best course of action at this point?
> >=20
> > My guess is that this patch gets ignored because it has a lower version
> > number than a previous patch.
> >=20
> > Take the feedback given here, and rev to
> > [PATCH v5] staging: axis-fifo: initialize timeouts in probe only
> >=20
> > Be sure the Changelog, below the --- explains the journey.
> >=20
> > Changes in v5:
> >=20
> > Changes in v4:
> >=20
> > Changes in v3:
>=20
> > Changes in v2:
> Hey Alison!
> Based on Nathan's feedback I am trying to recompile and send a patch
> without any warnings.
> As suggested by Fabio, I am running "make w=3D1 -jX" command to see if I
> get any warnings. But it is taking a lot of time, is there any way of
> speeding it up?
> If this doesn't work then I have to follow the steps to reproduce in lkp
> mail as you said before.
> After dealing with these warnings I will send a [PATCH v5], following
> your instructions above.
> Kindly, let me know if I am on the wrong track.
> Thank you!
>=20
> Regards,
> Khadija
>=20
> > > Fabio

Aside from what I said and asked for with the other message of this same=20
thread, please take note that you can build a specific module if you prefer=
=20
not to re-build the whole kernel and other modules at the same time.=20

I'm pretty sure that the instructions to do so are in the OutreachyFirstPat=
ch=20
tutorial.

If they are not there, please let us know.

=46abio