[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Cleanup port 0x80 use (was: Re: IO delay ...)
> I am still wondering, though, why this method of getting a delay
> is used so often. IMO in most places one could use udelay(1) instead,
> with much less risk of doing wrong.

udelay(1) I don't believe is enough. Unfortunately I can't find my
documentation on the ISA bus which covers the timeout for acknowledging an
address cycle. Otherwise for tsc capable boxes I agree entirely.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:25    [W:0.166 / U:0.740 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site