> > diff --git a/drivers/misc/mei/bus-fixup.c b/drivers/misc/mei/bus-fixup.c > > index 71fbf0bc8453..3174cad8a5cc 100644 > > --- a/drivers/misc/mei/bus-fixup.c > > +++ b/drivers/misc/mei/bus-fixup.c > > @@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ static int mei_osver(struct mei_cl_device *cldev) > > os_ver = (struct mei_os_ver *)fwcaps->data; > > os_ver->os_type = OSTYPE_LINUX; > > > > - return __mei_cl_send(cldev->cl, buf, size, 0, mode); > > + return __mei_cl_send(cldev->cl, buf, size, 0, mode, 0); > > Ick, adding another parameter to a function is not helpful here, what > does 0 mean unless you look it up? > > > --- a/drivers/misc/mei/bus.c > > +++ b/drivers/misc/mei/bus.c > > @@ -29,11 +29,12 @@ > > * @length: buffer length > > * @vtag: virtual tag > > * @mode: sending mode > > + * @timeout: send timeout for blocking writes, 0 for infinite timeout > > What units are these in? Jiffies? seconds? hours? Don't make us > guess :( > Sure, will add mention of msec here. > Why not write a function that is mei_cl_send_timeout() that has the new > option? That way it's obvious that the other ones are blocking, right? > Yes, renaming extended __mei_cl_send with __mei_cl_send_timeout and making __mei_cl_send as wrapper to __mei_cl_send_timeout will make code lot cleaner and fix the not understandable 0 from the first comment. Thanks for a good tip! > thanks, > > greg k-h -- Thanks, Sasha
