[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87shbg2sbz.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Jan 2018 19:06:24 +0200
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
Cc: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com>, kstewart@...uxfoundation.org,
johannes.berg@...el.com, tiwai@...e.de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
andrew.zaborowski@...el.com, b43-dev@...ts.infradead.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, colin.king@...onical.com
Subject: Re: b43: Replace mdelay with msleep in b43_radio_2057_init_post
Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net> writes:
> On 01/08/2018 10:21 AM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>>> b43_radio_2057_init_post is not called in an interrupt handler
>>> nor holding a spinlock.
>>> The function mdelay in it can be replaced with msleep, to reduce busy wait.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jia-Ju Bai <baijiaju1990@...il.com>
>>
>> You submitted an identical patch a week earlier:
>>
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10137671/
>>
>> How is this different? Also always add version number to the patch so that the
>> maintainers can follow the changes easily:
>>
>> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#patch_version_missing
>>
>> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches#changelog_missing
>
> I had negative comments on one of those due to the possibility of
> msleep(2) extending as long as 20 msec. Until the author, or someone
> else, can test that this is OK, then the mdelay(2) can only be
> replaced with usleep_range(2000, 3000).
>
> NACK for both.
Ok, patches dropped.
--
Kalle Valo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists