On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 12:19:48PM +0200, Loic Poulain wrote: > On Thu, 30 Sept 2021 at 10:08, Thomas Perrot <thomas.perrot@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Hello, > > [...] > I agree, let's set a conservative high value for generic SDX55, so > have wider support, that can be tuned per vendor IDs if necessary > anyway. > No. Since this device seems to have a dedicated config, let's increase the timeout only for this device until we get reports for other devices. > Regards, > Loic > > > > > Moreover, Sierra EM919x modems use a custom controller configuration, > > we are currently working on it. As our tests not being sufficiently > > conclusive, so we have not yet submitted. > > > > Best regards, > > Thomas > > > > > > > > > > It was derived from testing I believe. > > > > > > Following your reasoning above, shouldn't this 24000ms timeout be > > > applied only to the Sierra Wireless EM91xx devices (which may have > > > custom firmware bits delaying the initialization a bit longer), and > > > not to the generic SDX24, SDX55 and SDX65? > > > > > > If I'm not mistaken, Thomas is testing with a custom mhi_pci_generic > > > entry for the EM91xx; as in > > > https://forum.sierrawireless.com/t/sierra-wireless-airprime-em919x-pcie-support/24927 > > > . > > > I'm also playing with that same entry on my own setup, but have other > > > problems of my own :) > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Aleksander > > > https://aleksander.es > > > > -- > > Thomas Perrot, Bootlin > > Embedded Linux and kernel engineering > > https://bootlin.com > >
