Re: [PATCH] deinline sleep/delay functions

Vojtech Pavlik
2005-07-01T07:54:51Z

On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 12:47:21PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 13:21 +0300, Denis Vlasenko wrote:
> > On Thursday 30 June 2005 12:19, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > >
> > > > > There are a number of compile-time checks that your patch has removed
> > > > > which catch such things, and as such your patch is not acceptable.
> > > > > Some architectures have a lower threshold of acceptability for the
> > > > > maximum udelay value, so it's absolutely necessary to keep this.
> > > >
> > > > It removes that check from x86 - other architectures retain it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > For users, _any_ value, however large, will work for
> > any delay function.
>
> that's not desired though. Desired is to limit udelay() to say 2000 or
> so. And force anything above that to go via mdelay() (just to make it
> stand out as broken code ;)
>
> Over time we also want to phase out mdelay of course...

The joystick drivers will (sadly) need mdelay forever,
due to hardware crappines.

--
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs, SuSE CR