usleep_range() is intended for delays in the 10us to 10ms range that need
good precision. a useleep_range(1, will effectively be no more than an
imprecise udelay with some added cache disruption as it will fire more or
less immediately - use udelay() here.
Fixes: commit be4fc046bed3 ("drm/i915: add VLV DSI PLL Calculations")
Signed-off-by: Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@xxxxxxxxx>
---
Problem located by coccinelle
The requirement of waiting at least 0.5 us is assured with the udelay(1)
here which should be more effective than a usleep_range() - would
ndelay(500) make sense here ?
Patch was compile tested with: x86_64_defconfig (implies CONFIG_DRM_I915)
Patch is against 4.9.0 (localvrsion-next is next-20161214)
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_pll.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_pll.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_pll.c
index 56eff60..0ec040e 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_pll.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_dsi_pll.c
@@ -157,7 +157,7 @@ static void vlv_enable_dsi_pll(struct intel_encoder *encoder,
config->dsi_pll.ctrl & ~DSI_PLL_VCO_EN);
/* wait at least 0.5 us after ungating before enabling VCO */
- usleep_range(1, 10);
+ udelay(1);
vlv_cck_write(dev_priv, CCK_REG_DSI_PLL_CONTROL, config->dsi_pll.ctrl);
--
2.1.4
_______________________________________________
Intel-gfx mailing list
Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
