[PATCH linux dev-4.10] fsi: core: Allow more BREAKs to recover a failing link

[Christopher Bostic]

On 10/29/17 11:04 PM, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
> On Mon, 2017-10-23 at 10:57 +0800, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>>> Recovering a failing FSI link can require more than a single
>>> BREAK command to reset the FSI slave. Test results indicate
>>> that communications can be restored when a second or third
>>> BREAK is sent when the previous attempts fail.
>> This seems somewhat suspicious to me. Do we have any indication from the
>> CFAM documentation, or the folks responsible for the CFAM implentation,
>> that multiple breaks will actually cause any difference in behaviour
>> that a single one? Or is this based only on experimentation?
>>
>> I'm worried that we'd be papering-over the underlying issue here.
>>
> Chris, my understanding is we're abandoning the approach in this patch.
> Is that correct?

Yes that's correct.   Focus is now on finding cause for the bus 
contention instead of recovering from it.

Chris
>
> Andrew