Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: tickle nmi watchdog whilst doing serial writes. | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Date | Fri, 13 May 2005 21:14:52 +0200 |
| |
On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 14:48 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > if (up->port.flags & UPF_CONS_FLOW) { > tmout = 1000000; > while (--tmout && > - ((serial_in(up, UART_MSR) & UART_MSR_CTS) == 0)) > + ((serial_in(up, UART_MSR) & UART_MSR_CTS) == 0)) { > udelay(1); > + touch_nmi_watchdog(); > + } > } > } > > > We *could* tickle it less often, but given we're busy waiting anyway > it probably doesnt make sense to not favour the more simple approach. > Hmm, maybe we want a cpu_relax() in there too. opinions?
udelay() includes cpu_relax() already so that is futile.
However.. this is a hack. Do we really need to do busy waiting here for this long??
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |