From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com (qw-out-2122.google.com [74.125.92.24]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EFA6DE0A6 for ; Tue, 19 May 2009 08:49:14 +1000 (EST) Received: by qw-out-2122.google.com with SMTP id 3so2381446qwe.15 for ; Mon, 18 May 2009 15:49:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: timur.tabi@gmail.com In-Reply-To: References: <1241560385-26868-1-git-send-email-timur@freescale.com> <4A0C40D4.1090508@freescale.com> Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 17:49:12 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] introduce macro spin_event_timeout() From: Timur Tabi To: Grant Likely Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: scottwood@freescale.com, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, smaclennan@pikatech.com List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Grant Likely wrote: > In other words, write your patches which use it and submit the lot as > a patch series with this patch as the first. =A0That gives some evidence > that this macro will actually be used and useful. This is going to be more difficult than you think. The problem is that I don't have access to much hardware that uses drivers which can take advantage of this macro. I can find one, maybe two examples, but if I put a timeout that's too short, I might break some other platform without knowing it. --=20 Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale