[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201301151323.28879.arnd@arndb.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 13:23:28 +0000
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linus.walleij@...ricsson.com, cbouatmailru@...il.com,
Jonas Aaberg <jonas.aberg@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/18] power: ab8500_fg: Replace msleep() with usleep_range() for greater accuracy
On Tuesday 15 January 2013, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > @@ -956,7 +956,7 @@ static int ab8500_fg_load_comp_volt_to_capacity(struct ab8500_fg *di)
> > > do {
> > > vbat += ab8500_fg_bat_voltage(di);
> > > i++;
> > > - msleep(5);
> > > + usleep_range(5000, 5001);
> >
> > If you're going to give a range that small
> > you might as well use usleep instead.
> >
> > Otherwise, add some tolerance to allow any
> > other coalesced wakeup to occur.
>
> I can't increase the tolerance, as I don't know how that would
> effect the running of the system, and the person who would know
> is off on parental leave.
The function only averages the voltage between a couple of readings.
It won't change much if those register reads are slightly more
uniformly timed. Note that the thread can still be preempted for
a much longer time if anything else is running, and the entire
interrupt handling in this driver looks so fragile that I would
not rely on the interrupt actually happening at the right time
anyway. I think it should first be debugged properly to remove
the need for the enable_irq/disable_irq calls.
Arnd
--
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