Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 28 Jul 2010 13:24:04 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/4] Checkpatch: prefer usleep over udelay |
| |
On Wed, 28 Jul 2010 12:33:06 -0700 Patrick Pannuto <ppannuto@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> When possible, sleeping is (usually) better than delaying; > however, don't bother callers of udelay < 10us, as those > cases are generally not worth the switch to usleep > > Signed-off-by: Patrick Pannuto <ppannuto@codeaurora.org> > --- > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 8 ++++++++ > 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > index bd88f11..892ae62 100755 > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > @@ -2570,6 +2570,14 @@ sub process { > } > } > > +# prefer usleep over udelay > + if (($line =~ /\budelay\s*\(\s*(\w+)\s*\)/ { > + # ignore udelay's < 10, however > + if (! (($1 =~ /(\d+)/) && ($1 < 10)) ) { > + CHK("usleep is preferred over udelay; see Documentation/timers/delays.txt\n" . $line); > + } > + }
It'd be better to recommend usleep_range(), IMO. To make people aware of what they're doing, and to think about it.
| |