On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 07:16:17PM +0000, Wentland, Harry wrote: > On 2019-02-01 12:31 p.m., sylvain.bertrand@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 01, 2019 at 10:28:13AM -0500, Bhawanpreet Lakha wrote: > >> From: John Barberiz <John.Barberiz@xxxxxxx> > >> [How] > >> msleep is inaccurate for small values. Used udelay > >> instead for accuracy. > > > > Hi, > > > > Should it be the case for non-DC displayport code too? > > > > I don't think we're actually using this code on Linux. It's part of the shared codebase with Windows. Apparently there msleep would often sleep longer than 1ms. > > drm_dp_dpcd_access already has a tighter bound on the sleep between retries (500-600 us), so I imagine we're fine there. Do you mean non-DC displayport related code is already using udelay instead of msleep on linux? -- Sylvain _______________________________________________ amd-gfx mailing list amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
