RDMA/bnxt_re: Fix incorrect errno used in function comments

The function comments in qplib_rcfw.c mention -ETIMEOUT as a
possible return value. However, the correct errno is -ETIMEDOUT.

Update the comments to reflect the proper return value to avoid
confusion for developers and users referring to the code.

Signed-off-by: Alok Tiwari <alok.a.tiwari@oracle.com>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/20250921081854.1059094-1-alok.a.tiwari@oracle.com
Signed-off-by: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
This commit is contained in:
Alok Tiwari 2025-09-21 01:18:48 -07:00 committed by Leon Romanovsky
parent 4b6b6233f5
commit 9b9e32f75a

View File

@ -186,7 +186,7 @@ static int __wait_for_resp(struct bnxt_qplib_rcfw *rcfw, u16 cookie)
* wait for command completion. Maximum holding interval is 8 second.
*
* Returns:
* -ETIMEOUT if command is not completed in specific time interval.
* -ETIMEDOUT if command is not completed in specific time interval.
* 0 if command is completed by firmware.
*/
static int __block_for_resp(struct bnxt_qplib_rcfw *rcfw, u16 cookie)
@ -382,7 +382,7 @@ static int __send_message(struct bnxt_qplib_rcfw *rcfw,
* This function can not be called from non-sleepable context.
*
* Returns:
* -ETIMEOUT if command is not completed in specific time interval.
* -ETIMEDOUT if command is not completed in specific time interval.
* 0 if command is completed by firmware.
*/
static int __poll_for_resp(struct bnxt_qplib_rcfw *rcfw, u16 cookie)