From: Alison Schofield <alison.schofield@intel.com>
To: Tanjuate Brunostar <tanjubrunostar0@gmail.com>
Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, outreachy@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: rts5208: Replace instances of udelay by usleep_range
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 10:26:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y07hq98H0Qx18AcB@aschofie-mobl2> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y07OcqPNjSihOByt@elroy-temp-vm.gaiao0uenmiufjlowqgp5yxwdh.gvxx.internal.cloudapp.net>
On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 04:04:02PM +0000, Tanjuate Brunostar wrote:
> Replace the use of udelay by usleep_range as suggested by checkpatch:
>
> CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay; see Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst
> + udelay(30);
>
> CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay; see Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst
> + udelay(50);
>
Hi Tanjuate,
I'd expect the commit log here to tell me why this is preferable, and
why this is safe to do - basically your summary of what you found
when you considered the checkpatch error report and then read
timers-howto.rst. Including that this was found my Checkpatch is
good, but that's basically a footnote to the log message, not the
main point.
Having said all that, I see GregKH response and that is typical
for this change. This type of change, needs to be actually tested,
so it's not a good cleanup unless you have the device or some other
convincing proof that what you are doing is safe.
Outreachy advice: when you see a checkpatch error, and are
wondering how its fix will be received, search the Outreachy
mail archive for it. This one, I find repeated instances of
the change being NAK'd because the submitter cannot test it.
Alison
> Signed-off-by: Tanjuate Brunostar <tanjubrunostar0@gmail.com>
> ---
>
> v2: changed the max values of the usleep_rage instances as they cannot
> be equal to the min values as suggested by checkpatch
>
> drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c b/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c
> index 14449f8afad5..a9724ca5eccf 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c
> @@ -3235,7 +3235,7 @@ static int ms_write_multiple_pages(struct rtsx_chip *chip, u16 old_blk,
> return STATUS_FAIL;
> }
>
> - udelay(30);
> + usleep_range(30, 31);
>
> rtsx_init_cmd(chip);
>
> @@ -4157,7 +4157,7 @@ int mg_set_ICV(struct scsi_cmnd *srb, struct rtsx_chip *chip)
>
> #ifdef MG_SET_ICV_SLOW
> for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
> - udelay(50);
> + usleep_range(50, 51);
>
> rtsx_init_cmd(chip);
>
> --
> 2.34.1
>
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-10-18 17:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-18 16:04 [PATCH v2] staging: rts5208: Replace instances of udelay by usleep_range Tanjuate Brunostar
2022-10-18 17:06 ` Greg KH
2022-10-18 17:49 ` Greg KH
2022-10-18 18:06 ` Greg KH
2022-10-18 17:26 ` Alison Schofield [this message]
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=Y07hq98H0Qx18AcB@aschofie-mobl2 \
--to=alison.schofield@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-staging@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=outreachy@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=tanjubrunostar0@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox