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.c...@broadcom.com>
---
 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 8bc7e49..1ddd672 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/broadcom/bnxt/bnxt.c
@@ -3903,7 +3903,7 @@ 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
-- 
2.5.1

Reply via email to