Nico Huber has uploaded this change for review. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/libgfxinit/+/35450 )
Change subject: gma i2c: Increase timeout, again ......................................................................
gma i2c: Increase timeout, again
Can a timeout be long enough? We still face the same problem as in 68f439d4f1 (gma i2c: Increase timeout to >100ms). User reports have shown, that the 110ms still were not enough, 200ms would be but to be safe this time, increase the timeout to 500ms. That may result in very long delays, but only if the hardware is even more broken that what we encountered so far.
Change-Id: Ia7b28f5a4ed1cd382a7ebfba5ce1ffe1b7a333a8 Signed-off-by: Nico Huber nico.huber@secunet.com --- M common/hw-gfx-gma-i2c.adb 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
git pull ssh://review.coreboot.org:29418/libgfxinit refs/changes/50/35450/1
diff --git a/common/hw-gfx-gma-i2c.adb b/common/hw-gfx-gma-i2c.adb index bc81734..73f95de 100644 --- a/common/hw-gfx-gma-i2c.adb +++ b/common/hw-gfx-gma-i2c.adb @@ -225,7 +225,7 @@ Registers.Wait_Set_Mask (Register => GMBUS_Regs (2), Mask => GMBUS2_HARDWARE_READY, - TOut_MS => 110); + TOut_MS => 500);
Registers.Read (GMBUS_Regs (2), GMBUS2); Success := (GMBUS2 and GMBUS2_HARDWARE_READY) /= 0 and
Nico Huber has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/libgfxinit/+/35450 )
Change subject: gma i2c: Increase timeout, again ......................................................................
Patch Set 1: Verified+1
Angel Pons has posted comments on this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/libgfxinit/+/35450 )
Change subject: gma i2c: Increase timeout, again ......................................................................
Patch Set 1: Code-Review+2
Nico Huber has submitted this change. ( https://review.coreboot.org/c/libgfxinit/+/35450 )
Change subject: gma i2c: Increase timeout, again ......................................................................
gma i2c: Increase timeout, again
Can a timeout be long enough? We still face the same problem as in 68f439d4f1 (gma i2c: Increase timeout to >100ms). User reports have shown, that the 110ms still were not enough, 200ms would be but to be safe this time, increase the timeout to 500ms. That may result in very long delays, but only if the hardware is even more broken that what we encountered so far.
Change-Id: Ia7b28f5a4ed1cd382a7ebfba5ce1ffe1b7a333a8 Signed-off-by: Nico Huber nico.huber@secunet.com Reviewed-on: https://review.coreboot.org/c/libgfxinit/+/35450 Tested-by: Nico Huber nico.h@gmx.de Reviewed-by: Angel Pons th3fanbus@gmail.com --- M common/hw-gfx-gma-i2c.adb 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Approvals: Nico Huber: Verified Angel Pons: Looks good to me, approved
diff --git a/common/hw-gfx-gma-i2c.adb b/common/hw-gfx-gma-i2c.adb index 3d41174..a958e26 100644 --- a/common/hw-gfx-gma-i2c.adb +++ b/common/hw-gfx-gma-i2c.adb @@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ Registers.Wait_Set_Mask (Register => GMBUS_Regs (2), Mask => GMBUS2_HARDWARE_READY, - TOut_MS => 110); + TOut_MS => 500);
Registers.Read (GMBUS_Regs (2), GMBUS2); Success := (GMBUS2 and GMBUS2_HARDWARE_READY) /= 0 and
-
Angel Pons (Code Review) -
Nico Huber (Code Review)