From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
To: Marc Dietrich <marvin24@gmx.de>
Cc: devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
outreachy-kernel <outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com>,
linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
SIMRAN SINGHAL <singhalsimran0@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] staging: nvec: cleanup USLEEP_RANGEcheckpatch checks
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 13:46:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170308124642.GC29118@ulmo.ba.sec> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1935856.5rv8sDmiv7@fb07-iapwap2>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1121 bytes --]
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 03:57:01PM +0100, Marc Dietrich wrote:
> Hi Simran,
>
> Am Donnerstag, 2. März 2017, 15:48:13 CET schrieb SIMRAN SINGHAL:
> > On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 8:06:40 PM UTC+5:30, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2017, simran singhal wrote:
> > > > Resolve strict checkpatch USLEEP_RANGE checks by converting delays and
> > > > sleeps as described in ./Documentation/timers/timers-howto.txt.
> > > >
> > > > CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay; see Documentation/
> > > > timers/timers-howto.txt
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: simran singhal <singhal...@gmail.com <javascript:>>
>
> I prefer not to change this. The whole interrupt routine is very wonky, and
> changing some delays might break the communication with the i2c master. Also
> this is in interrupt context, so a change to usleep_range may not by
> justified.
Yeah, I think this is going to trigger a WARN_ON from somewhere in the
scheduler because of the interrupt context. I suppose checkpatch could
be made smarter about this, though I doubt my perl skills would be up
to it.
Thierry
[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 169 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
To: Marc Dietrich <marvin24@gmx.de>
Cc: SIMRAN SINGHAL <singhalsimran0@gmail.com>,
linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
outreachy-kernel <outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com>,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] staging: nvec: cleanup USLEEP_RANGEcheckpatch checks
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 13:46:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170308124642.GC29118@ulmo.ba.sec> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1935856.5rv8sDmiv7@fb07-iapwap2>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1121 bytes --]
On Thu, Mar 02, 2017 at 03:57:01PM +0100, Marc Dietrich wrote:
> Hi Simran,
>
> Am Donnerstag, 2. März 2017, 15:48:13 CET schrieb SIMRAN SINGHAL:
> > On Thursday, March 2, 2017 at 8:06:40 PM UTC+5:30, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2017, simran singhal wrote:
> > > > Resolve strict checkpatch USLEEP_RANGE checks by converting delays and
> > > > sleeps as described in ./Documentation/timers/timers-howto.txt.
> > > >
> > > > CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay; see Documentation/
> > > > timers/timers-howto.txt
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: simran singhal <singhal...@gmail.com <javascript:>>
>
> I prefer not to change this. The whole interrupt routine is very wonky, and
> changing some delays might break the communication with the i2c master. Also
> this is in interrupt context, so a change to usleep_range may not by
> justified.
Yeah, I think this is going to trigger a WARN_ON from somewhere in the
scheduler because of the interrupt context. I suppose checkpatch could
be made smarter about this, though I doubt my perl skills would be up
to it.
Thierry
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-08 12:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-02 14:24 [PATCH] staging: nvec: cleanup USLEEP_RANGE checkpatch checks simran singhal
2017-03-02 14:24 ` simran singhal
2017-03-02 14:36 ` [Outreachy kernel] " Julia Lawall
2017-03-02 14:36 ` Julia Lawall
2017-03-02 14:48 ` SIMRAN SINGHAL
2017-03-02 14:57 ` [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] staging: nvec: cleanup USLEEP_RANGEcheckpatch checks Marc Dietrich
2017-03-02 14:57 ` Marc Dietrich
2017-03-02 15:28 ` SIMRAN SINGHAL
2017-03-08 12:46 ` Thierry Reding [this message]
2017-03-08 12:46 ` Thierry Reding
2017-03-02 15:01 ` [Outreachy kernel] [PATCH] staging: nvec: cleanup USLEEP_RANGE checkpatch checks Julia Lawall
2017-03-02 15:01 ` Julia Lawall
2017-03-02 15:17 ` SIMRAN SINGHAL
2017-03-02 15:18 ` Julia Lawall
2017-03-02 15:18 ` Julia Lawall
2017-03-02 15:18 ` Julia Lawall
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170308124642.GC29118@ulmo.ba.sec \
--to=thierry.reding@gmail.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marvin24@gmx.de \
--cc=outreachy-kernel@googlegroups.com \
--cc=singhalsimran0@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.