Re: [PATCH 1/8] staging: vchiq_arm: replace sleep() with usleep_range()
flat view
From: Stefan Wahren <hidden>
Date: 2021-09-15 05:22:22
Also in:
linux-staging, lkml
Hi, Am 14.09.21 um 23:35 schrieb Gaston Gonzalez:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
usleep_range() should be used instead of sleep() when sleepings range from 10 us to 20 ms, [1]. Reported by checkpatch.pl [1] Documentation/timers/timers-howto.txt --- drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_arm.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_arm.c b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_arm.c index b25369a13452..0214ae37e01f 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_arm.c +++ b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_arm.c@@ -824,7 +824,7 @@ vchiq_bulk_transmit(unsigned int handle, const void *data, unsigned int size, if (status != VCHIQ_RETRY) break; - msleep(1); + usleep_range(1000, 1100);
from my understanding the usage of usleep_range() and hrtimers isn't necessary here. The intention is to sleep a little bit and not "exactly" 1 ms. @Phil Elwell: what is your opinion?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
} return status;@@ -861,7 +861,7 @@ enum vchiq_status vchiq_bulk_receive(unsigned int handle, void *data, if (status != VCHIQ_RETRY) break; - msleep(1); + usleep_range(1000, 1100);
dito
} return status;
_______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel