[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <871vbwafwu.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 12:22:41 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Patrick Pannuto <ppannuto@...eaurora.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, sboyd@...eaurora.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com,
eranian@...gle.com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] timer: Added usleep[_range][_interruptable] timer
Patrick Pannuto <ppannuto@...eaurora.org> writes:
Overall it seems like a good improvement.
> +
> +static inline void usleep(unsigned long usecs)
> +{
> + usleep_range(usecs, usecs);
> +}
> +
> +static inline unsigned long usleep_interruptible(unsigned long usecs)
Is the interruptible case even needed? I assume most drivers won't
bother with that and not being interruptible for a few usecs is not a
big issue.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists