Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 1 Jul 2005 09:54:34 +0200 | From | Vojtech Pavlik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] deinline sleep/delay functions |
| |
On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 12:47:21PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 13:21 +0300, Denis Vlasenko wrote: > > On Thursday 30 June 2005 12:19, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > > > > > > There are a number of compile-time checks that your patch has removed > > > > > which catch such things, and as such your patch is not acceptable. > > > > > Some architectures have a lower threshold of acceptability for the > > > > > maximum udelay value, so it's absolutely necessary to keep this. > > > > > > > > It removes that check from x86 - other architectures retain it. > > > > > > > > > > For users, _any_ value, however large, will work for > > any delay function. > > that's not desired though. Desired is to limit udelay() to say 2000 or > so. And force anything above that to go via mdelay() (just to make it > stand out as broken code ;) > > Over time we also want to phase out mdelay of course...
The joystick drivers will (sadly) need mdelay forever, due to hardware crappines.
-- Vojtech Pavlik SuSE Labs, SuSE CR - 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/
| |