Re: [PATCH 1/7] netpoll: shorten carrier detect timeout

[Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>]

Matt Mackall wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2005 at 05:35:05AM +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
> > > So I'm going to change it from "flaky" to "untrustworthy" and add a
> > > comment.
> > Why don't you trust an instaneously available carrier? Any
> > reason to assume there will be false positives?
>
> Because I had reports of people losing all their boot messages until
> this logic was added (about a year ago now?). I don't remember which
> NICs were implicated, but some apparently report carrier is always
> available.
If this problem is not common, I think it would be better to make
this behaviour dependant on a boot parameter instead of forcing
everyone to wait for 4s. Additionally you could have a blacklist
of flaky NICs.

Regards
Patrick