From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 04 Aug 2003 22:38:19 +0100 (BST) Received: from p508B61A2.dip.t-dialin.net ([IPv6:::ffff:80.139.97.162]:26518 "EHLO dea.linux-mips.net") by linux-mips.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 22:38:17 +0100 Received: from dea.linux-mips.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dea.linux-mips.net (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h74LcDpR028775; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:38:13 +0200 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by dea.linux-mips.net (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id h74LcC3B028774; Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:38:12 +0200 Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2003 23:38:12 +0200 From: Ralf Baechle To: Pete Popov Cc: Linux MIPS mailing list Subject: Re: udelay Message-ID: <20030804213812.GA21327@linux-mips.org> References: <1059788948.9224.62.camel@zeus.mvista.com> <20030804014132.GA4419@linux-mips.org> <1060018159.9217.93.camel@zeus.mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1060018159.9217.93.camel@zeus.mvista.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 2982 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: ralf@linux-mips.org Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Mon, Aug 04, 2003 at 10:29:20AM -0700, Pete Popov wrote: > > > Looks like the latest udelay in 2.4 is borked. Anyway else notice that > > > problem? I did a 10 sec test: mdelay works, udelay is broken, at least > > > for the CPU and toolchain I'm using. > > > > That just doesn't make sense. Mdelay is based on udelay so if udelay > > is broken mdelay should be broken, too. > > I think the problem may be occurring when udelay is used with very large > values, like 10000. I've told the developer that that's not recommended > and to use mdelays in that case. Any bug report for udelay arguments larger than 1000 will probably be ignored ... Ralf