4.19-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
[ Upstream commit 67681d02aaa1db9044a16df4ca9c77cde1221a3e ]
The logic that polls for the firmware message response uses a shorter
sleep interval for the first few passes. But there was a typo so it
was using the wrong counter (larger counter) for these short sleep
passes. The result is a slightly shorter timeout period for these
firmware messages than intended. Fix it by using the proper counter.
Fixes: 9751e8e71487 ("bnxt_en: reduce timeout on initial HWRM calls")
Signed-off-by: Michael Chan <michael.chan@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt.c
index 1fdaf86bbe8f..63b97289f4fe 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt.c
@@ -3542,7 +3542,7 @@ static int bnxt_hwrm_do_send_msg(struct bnxt *bp, void *msg, u32 msg_len,
if (len)
break;
/* on first few passes, just barely sleep */
- if (i < DFLT_HWRM_CMD_TIMEOUT)
+ if (i < HWRM_SHORT_TIMEOUT_COUNTER)
usleep_range(HWRM_SHORT_MIN_TIMEOUT,
HWRM_SHORT_MAX_TIMEOUT);
else
--
2.19.1
