On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 12:56:33PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
On Fri, Mar 02, 2018 at 12:26:35AM +0530, Nayna Jain wrote:
quoted
On 03/01/2018 02:52 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
quoted
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 02:18:27PM -0500, Nayna Jain wrote:
quoted
In tpm_transmit, after send(), the code checks for status in a loop
Maybe cutting hairs now but please just use the actual function name
instead of send(). Just makes the commit log more useful asset.
Sure, will do.
quoted
quoted
- tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT);
+ tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL);
What about just calling schedule()?
I'm not sure what you mean by "schedule()". Are you suggesting instead of
using usleep_range(), using something with an even finer grain construct?
Thanks & Regards,
- Nayna
kernel/sched/core.c
The question I'm trying ask to is: is it better to sleep such a short
time or just ask scheduler to schedule something else after each
iteration?
/Jarkko