From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Hassan Shahbazi <hassan.shahbazi@somia.fi>
Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org,
devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: fbtft: fb_watterott: fix usleep_range is preferred over udelay
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 11:01:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201106100149.GA2705820@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201101103244.GA284952@ubuntu>
On Sun, Nov 01, 2020 at 12:32:44PM +0200, Hassan Shahbazi wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 01, 2020 at 07:39:48AM +0100, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 01, 2020 at 02:20:10AM +0200, Hassan Shahbazi wrote:
> > > Fix the checkpath.pl issue on fb_watterott.c. write_vmem and
> > > write_vmem_8bit functions are within non-atomic context and can
> > > safely use usleep_range.
> > > see Documentation/timers/timers-howto.txt
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Hassan Shahbazi <hassan@ninchat.com>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_watterott.c | 4 ++--
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_watterott.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_watterott.c
> > > index 76b25df376b8..afcc86a17995 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_watterott.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_watterott.c
> > > @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ static int write_vmem(struct fbtft_par *par, size_t offset, size_t len)
> > > par->txbuf.buf, 10 + par->info->fix.line_length);
> > > if (ret < 0)
> > > return ret;
> > > - udelay(300);
> > > + usleep_range(300, 310);
> > > }
> > >
> > > return 0;
> > > @@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ static int write_vmem_8bit(struct fbtft_par *par, size_t offset, size_t len)
> > > par->txbuf.buf, 10 + par->info->var.xres);
> > > if (ret < 0)
> > > return ret;
> > > - udelay(700);
> > > + usleep_range(700, 710);
> >
> > How do you know that these ranges are ok? Are you able to test these
> > changes with real hardware?
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h
>
> No, I don't have the hardware to test with. I just used the current
> value as the minimum and added an epsilon to it for the maximum
> param.
It's best not to guess about this, sorry, you should have the hardware
to test this type of change.
thanks,
greg k-h
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-06 10:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-01 0:20 [PATCH] staging: fbtft: fb_watterott: fix usleep_range is preferred over udelay Hassan Shahbazi
2020-11-01 6:39 ` Greg KH
2020-11-01 10:32 ` Hassan Shahbazi
2020-11-06 10:01 ` Greg KH [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=20201106100149.GA2705820@kroah.com \
--to=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=devel@driverdev.osuosl.org \
--cc=dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org \
--cc=hassan.shahbazi@somia.fi \
--cc=linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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