[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56A1F935.2040904@nvidia.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 15:11:09 +0530
From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>, <rtc-linux@...glegroups.com>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/10] rtc: max77686: Use usleep_range() instead of
msleep()
On Friday 22 January 2016 01:53 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> RTC_SEC = 0,
> @@ -130,7 +130,8 @@ static int max77686_rtc_update(struct max77686_rtc_info *info,
> __func__, ret, data);
> else {
> /* Minimum 16ms delay required before RTC update. */
> - msleep(MAX77686_RTC_UPDATE_DELAY);
> + usleep_range(MAX77686_RTC_UPDATE_DELAY,
> + MAX77686_RTC_UPDATE_DELAY * 2);
> }
>
Instead of making usleep_range(16000, 32000), can we make small range as
usleep_range(16000, 17000)?
I am using as usleep_range(16000, 16000) always.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists