linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC] ASoC: rt5663: use msleep() for long delay loop

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:   Tue, 17 Jan 2017 19:34:34 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@...dl.org>
Cc:     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 RFC] ASoC: rt5663: use msleep() for long delay loop

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 04:03:13PM +0100, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> As the overall delay is in range of seconds and the wait granularity
> is 10ms msleep() seems more reasonable than to put load on the highres
> timer subsystem.

Thia also contains a whole bunch of other refactoring that's not
mentioned in the changelog...

> This does throw a checkpatch warning with:
> WARNING: msleep < 20ms can sleep for up to 20ms;"
> but since this is in a loop and the intended granularity is
> 10ms with up to 2 seconds total delay this seems ok.

That does depend on how quickly the operation is expected to complete,
the total delay is likely to be a massive overestimate.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)