[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH] base-files: Use the same LED timing as before for preinit_regular.

[Vittorio G (VittGam)]

> Il 29.12.2014 09:04 Rafał Miłecki ha scritto:
>> 1) I think that most OpenWrt users, like me, are accustomed to see a 
>> led
>> pattern of 200ms. I thought it was a bad flash or something else bad 
>> when
>> I've seen that 500ms blinking...
>
> Is there any reason for that? Was 200ms ever used or documented by 
> OpenWrt?

It has always been 200ms... The thing is that preinit_regular has been 
introduced some revisions ago.

Original:
Preinit, failsafe is possible: 200ms
Preinit, failsafe not possible anymore, booting normally: 200ms
Failsafe entered: 50ms

Now (after preinit_regular has been introduced):
Preinit, failsafe is possible: 200ms
Preinit, failsafe not possible anymore, booting normally: 500ms *here 
is the "offending" change*
Failsafe entered: 50ms

With my proposed patch:
Preinit, failsafe is possible: 100ms *indicate this condition with a 
new timing, that prompts the user to press the key if they want to start 
failsafe*
Preinit, failsafe not possible anymore, booting normally: 200ms *keep 
this as before*
Failsafe entered: 50ms

>> 2) "As before" means that when failsafe is possible, it is indicated 
>> by a
>> new pattern of 100ms. When it is not possible anymore, the
>> "classic"/previous 200ms pattern is used.
>
> "As before" and "new pattern" seem to be in conflict ;)

As before is referred to 200ms for the normal boot after the 2-second 
"failsafe-is-possible" condition.

> Same question (as above) about the 200ms. What makes it "classic" or 
> "previous"?

See above.

>
> 500ms looks OK for me, just calm booting, not sure about other people
> opinion. But I don't like using 50ms / 100ms / 200ms for 3 different
> states because I find them too close/similar. Also if preinit was
> always using 200ms (am I wrong? can you prove different interval?) I
> don't think we should change it to 100ms.

Calm booting is not good, 200ms makes it look like it's booting, 500ms 
seems that there is a problem... IMHO at least ;) (Also please try the 
led patterns on the hardware, the numbers alone might mislead. I thought 
the same of you too before testing...)
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel