netdev - Re: [PATCH 05/21] atm: he: use mdelay instead of large udelay constants

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 26 Apr 2013 09:12:20 -0400
From:	chas williams - CONTRACTOR <chas@....nrl.navy.mil>
To:	"David Laight" <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc:	"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-atm-general@...ts.sourceforge.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/21] atm: he: use mdelay instead of large udelay
 constants

On Fri, 26 Apr 2013 09:21:59 +0100
"David Laight" <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> wrote:

> > ARM cannot handle udelay for more than 2 miliseconds, so we
> > should use mdelay instead for those.
> ...
> > @@ -1055,7 +1055,7 @@ static int he_start(struct atm_dev *dev)
> >  	he_writel(he_dev, 0x0, RESET_CNTL);
> >  	he_writel(he_dev, 0xff, RESET_CNTL);
> > 
> > -	udelay(16*1000);	/* 16 ms */
> > +	mdelay(16);	/* 16 ms */
> >  	status = he_readl(he_dev, RESET_CNTL);
> 
> 16ms seems a long time to spin.
> I'd have thought a sleep would be more appropriate.
> Since this looks like timing a hardware reset pulse
> it can't matter if it is somewhat longer.

Yes, I wrote this bit some time ago when I was less wise. The
programmer's guide doesn't say how long to sleep, so the value isn't
critical.  It just has to be "long enough".  An msleep() would be fine
here.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html