From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lucas Stach Subject: Re: Weird/Unneeded call to msleep in exynos_mipi_dsi_wr_data in exynos_mipi_dsi_common.c Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 14:39:38 +0100 Message-ID: <1418909978.2236.0.camel@pengutronix.de> References: <54920A54.2060608@gmail.com> <5492ABE7.1060900@samsung.com> <5492D80E.3010906@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([92.198.50.35]:60352 "EHLO metis.ext.pengutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751705AbaLRNjq (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Dec 2014 08:39:46 -0500 In-Reply-To: <5492D80E.3010906@gmail.com> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: nick Cc: Krzysztof =?UTF-8?Q?Koz=C5=82owski?= , inki.dae@samsung.com, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, dh09.lee@samsung.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kyungmin.park@samsung.com, tomi.valkeinen@ti.com, kgene@kernel.org, plagnioj@jcrosoft.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Am Donnerstag, den 18.12.2014, 08:35 -0500 schrieb nick: > Krzysztof, > If we look at the code for this function, it already is handling the data correctly. In addition the locks > seem to be better protection then msleep. Further more is no reason for this delay as we are neither resetting > the hardware or waiting for the hardware here so why is it needed? I don't have Exynos based hardware lying > around through to test it. If you can't test it, don't touch it. It's that simple. Regards, Lucas -- Pengutronix e.K. | Lucas Stach | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |