[PATCH] b43: Replace mdelay with msleep in b43_radio_2057_init_post

[PATCH] b43: Replace mdelay with msleep in b43_radio_2057_init_post

[Jia-Ju Bai]

b43_radio_2057_init_post is not called in an interrupt handler 
nor holding a spinlock.
The function mdelay in it can be replaced with msleep, to reduce busy wait.

Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_n.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_n.c b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_n.c
index a5557d7..5bc838e 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_n.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_n.c
@@ -1031,7 +1031,7 @@ static void b43_radio_2057_init_post(struct b43_wldev *dev)
 
 	b43_radio_set(dev, R2057_RFPLL_MISC_CAL_RESETN, 0x78);
 	b43_radio_set(dev, R2057_XTAL_CONFIG2, 0x80);
-	mdelay(2);
+	msleep(2);
 	b43_radio_mask(dev, R2057_RFPLL_MISC_CAL_RESETN, ~0x78);
 	b43_radio_mask(dev, R2057_XTAL_CONFIG2, ~0x80);
 
-- 
1.7.9.5

[PATCH] b43: Replace mdelay with msleep in b43_radio_2057_init_post

[Jia-Ju Bai]

b43_radio_2057_init_post is not called in an interrupt handler 
nor holding a spinlock.
The function mdelay in it can be replaced with msleep, to reduce busy wait.

Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_n.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_n.c b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_n.c
index a5557d7..5bc838e 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_n.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_n.c
@@ -1031,7 +1031,7 @@ static void b43_radio_2057_init_post(struct b43_wldev *dev)
 
 	b43_radio_set(dev, R2057_RFPLL_MISC_CAL_RESETN, 0x78);
 	b43_radio_set(dev, R2057_XTAL_CONFIG2, 0x80);
-	mdelay(2);
+	msleep(2);
 	b43_radio_mask(dev, R2057_RFPLL_MISC_CAL_RESETN, ~0x78);
 	b43_radio_mask(dev, R2057_XTAL_CONFIG2, ~0x80);
 
-- 
1.7.9.5

Re: [PATCH] b43: Replace mdelay with msleep in b43_radio_2057_init_post

[Larry Finger]

On 12/30/2017 05:08 AM, Jia-Ju Bai wrote:
> b43_radio_2057_init_post is not called in an interrupt handler
> nor holding a spinlock.
> The function mdelay in it can be replaced with msleep, to reduce busy wait.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com>

checkpatch.pl reports the following warning for this patch:

WARNING: msleep < 20ms can sleep for up to 20ms; see 
Documentation/timers/timers-howto.txt
#26: FILE: drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/phy_n.c:1034:
+       msleep(2);

total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 checks, 8 lines checked

Have you tested to verify that a sleep as long as 20 ms will not cause problems? 
The referenced document suggests a usleep_range() call.

In general, delay changes should never be proposed without testing.

Larry

Re: b43: Replace mdelay with msleep in b43_radio_2057_init_post

[Kalle Valo]

Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> b43_radio_2057_init_post is not called in an interrupt handler 
> nor holding a spinlock.
> The function mdelay in it can be replaced with msleep, to reduce busy wait.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>

You submitted an identical patch a week earlier:

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10137671/

How is this different? Also always add version number to the patch so that the
maintainers can follow the changes easily:

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#patch_version_missing

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#changelog_missing

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10137671/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches

Re: b43: Replace mdelay with msleep in b43_radio_2057_init_post

[Kalle Valo]

Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com> wrote:

> b43_radio_2057_init_post is not called in an interrupt handler 
> nor holding a spinlock.
> The function mdelay in it can be replaced with msleep, to reduce busy wait.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com>

You submitted an identical patch a week earlier:

https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10137671/

How is this different? Also always add version number to the patch so that the
maintainers can follow the changes easily:

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#patch_version_missing

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#changelog_missing

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10137671/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches

Re: b43: Replace mdelay with msleep in b43_radio_2057_init_post

[Larry Finger]

On 01/08/2018 10:21 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> b43_radio_2057_init_post is not called in an interrupt handler
>> nor holding a spinlock.
>> The function mdelay in it can be replaced with msleep, to reduce busy wait.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com>
> 
> You submitted an identical patch a week earlier:
> 
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10137671/
> 
> How is this different? Also always add version number to the patch so that the
> maintainers can follow the changes easily:
> 
> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#patch_version_missing
> 
> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#changelog_missing

I had negative comments on one of those due to the possibility of msleep(2) 
extending as long as 20 msec. Until the author, or someone else, can test that 
this is OK, then the mdelay(2) can only be replaced with usleep_range(2000, 3000).

NACK for both.

Larry

Re: b43: Replace mdelay with msleep in b43_radio_2057_init_post

[Kalle Valo]

Larry Finger <Larry.Finger-tQ5ms3gMjBLk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org> writes:

> On 01/08/2018 10:21 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>>
>>> b43_radio_2057_init_post is not called in an interrupt handler
>>> nor holding a spinlock.
>>> The function mdelay in it can be replaced with msleep, to reduce busy wait.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
>>
>> You submitted an identical patch a week earlier:
>>
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10137671/
>>
>> How is this different? Also always add version number to the patch so that the
>> maintainers can follow the changes easily:
>>
>> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#patch_version_missing
>>
>> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#changelog_missing
>
> I had negative comments on one of those due to the possibility of
> msleep(2) extending as long as 20 msec. Until the author, or someone
> else, can test that this is OK, then the mdelay(2) can only be
> replaced with usleep_range(2000, 3000).
>
> NACK for both.

Ok, patches dropped.

-- 
Kalle Valo

Re: b43: Replace mdelay with msleep in b43_radio_2057_init_post

[Jia-Ju Bai]

On 2018/1/9 0:31, Larry Finger wrote:
> On 01/08/2018 10:21 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> b43_radio_2057_init_post is not called in an interrupt handler
>>> nor holding a spinlock.
>>> The function mdelay in it can be replaced with msleep, to reduce 
>>> busy wait.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@gmail.com>
>>
>> You submitted an identical patch a week earlier:
>>
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10137671/
>>
>> How is this different? Also always add version number to the patch so 
>> that the
>> maintainers can follow the changes easily:
>>
>> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#patch_version_missing 
>>
>>
>> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#changelog_missing 
>>
>
> I had negative comments on one of those due to the possibility of 
> msleep(2) extending as long as 20 msec. Until the author, or someone 
> else, can test that this is OK, then the mdelay(2) can only be 
> replaced with usleep_range(2000, 3000).
>
> NACK for both.
>
> Larry
>

Sorry for my mistake.
I have sent a patch v2 using usleep_range(2000, 3000), and you can have 
a look :)


Thanks,
Jia-Ju Bai