[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170112150406.wl24hryz3352wwwj@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 15:04:07 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@...r.at>
Cc: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>,
Bard Liao <bardliao@...ltek.com>,
Oder Chiou <oder_chiou@...ltek.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: rt5651: use msleep for large delays
On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 06:59:52PM +0000, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 06:06:58PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Yes, but as fairly recently discussed somewhere on the lists (and IIRC
> > actually fixed) approximately no users expect or want that behaviour -
> True its an odd behavior - the point just was to change the actual behavior
> as little from current state as one might expect. Anywa - will fix it up
Unfortunately the current state will often reflect a change from the
original or at least expected behaviour.
> then and resend - in this particular case it really makes little
Thanks.
> difference - assuming that both the minimum and maximum value were
> suitable to ensure that the writes had compled or it was actually a failure.
It can create confusion where the delay comes from a datasheet or tech
note and people are left wondering why a different value is used by the
kernel, and in a lot of the paths with delays in them are pretty
sensitive to the overall time to run so there's a strong desire to keep
the delays as low as possible.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists