Em 01-09-2011 02:13, Thierry Reding escreveu:

* Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:

quoted

Em 04-08-2011 04:14, Thierry Reding escreveu:

quoted

---
 drivers/staging/tm6000/tm6000-core.c |    3 ---
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/tm6000/tm6000-core.c b/drivers/staging/tm6000/tm6000-core.c
index e14bd3d..2c156dd 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/tm6000/tm6000-core.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/tm6000/tm6000-core.c

@@ -86,9 +86,6 @@ int tm6000_read_write_usb(struct tm6000_core *dev, u8 req_type, u8 req,
 	}
 
 	kfree(data);
-
-	msleep(5);
-
 	return ret;
 }
 

This delay is needed by some tm5600/6000 devices. Maybe it is due to
some specific chipset revision, but I can't remember anymore what
device(s) were affected.

The right thing to do seems to whitelist the devices that don't need
any delay there.

This was actually the first thing I patched because I couldn't see any need
for it (the Cinergy Hybrid USB Stick worked fine without) and it made the
device pretty much unusable (with this delay, firmware loading takes about
30 seconds!).

Firmware load timing sucks, but at least the device works. The windows application
load time is even worse than 30 s, at least for the devices I have here.

Do you want me to follow up with a white-listing patch?

Yes, please. It is good to speed it up, but only when we're sure that this won't cause
troubles.

Thierry