[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251229010814.94255-1-spxxky.dev@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2025 02:08:14 +0100
From: Alexandru Costin <spxxky.dev@...il.com>
To: andy@...nel.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc: dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Alexandru Costin <spxxky.dev@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH] Replace udelay() with usleep_range() in PLL initialization code. According to Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst, usleep_range() is preferred for delays "10us - 20ms"
Resolves checkpatch warnings:
WARNING: usleep_range is preferred over udelay
Signed-off-by: Alexandru Costin <spxxky.dev@...il.com>
---
drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ra8875.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ra8875.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ra8875.c
index 0ab1de6647d0..130150b0f07f 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ra8875.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fb_ra8875.c
@@ -210,7 +210,8 @@ static void write_reg8_bus8(struct fbtft_par *par, int len, ...)
}
len--;
- udelay(100);
+ usleep_range(100, 120);
+
if (len) {
buf = (u8 *)par->buf;
@@ -231,7 +232,7 @@ static void write_reg8_bus8(struct fbtft_par *par, int len, ...)
/* restore user spi-speed */
par->fbtftops.write = fbtft_write_spi;
- udelay(100);
+ usleep_range(100, 120);
}
static int write_vmem16_bus8(struct fbtft_par *par, size_t offset, size_t len)
--
2.43.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists