Hello David,
On 22.02.2011 19:24, David Miller wrote:
From: Henry Nestler <redacted>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2011 22:03:31 +0100
quoted
On 21.02.2011 12:14, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
quoted
On 21-02-2011 0:45, Henry Nestler wrote:
quoted
+ udelay(1000); /* delay needs by DM9000B */
Why not mdelay(1)?
Because udelay is the base of mdelay.
See include/linux/delay.h:31
#define mdelay(n) ... udelay((n)*1000)
He is telling you to use mdelay(1) because it's clearer. Please do
so.
Thanks, that text explains it better. No problem. I will resend this patch.
--
Henry N.