In most cases, usleep_range is better than udelay, as the precise wakeup from udelay is unnecessary. usleep_range gives a much better chance of coalescing processor wakeups. Signed-off-by: Shiva Kerdel <shiva@xxxxxxxx> --- drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_cls.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_cls.c b/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_cls.c index c20ffdd..6607243a 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_cls.c +++ b/drivers/staging/dgnc/dgnc_cls.c @@ -409,7 +409,7 @@ static void cls_assert_modem_signals(struct channel_t *ch) writeb(out, &ch->ch_cls_uart->mcr); /* Give time for the UART to actually drop the signals */ - udelay(10); + usleep_range(10, 20); } static void cls_copy_data_from_queue_to_uart(struct channel_t *ch) @@ -631,7 +631,7 @@ static void cls_flush_uart_read(struct channel_t *ch) * Presumably, this is a bug in this UART. */ - udelay(10); + usleep_range(10, 20); } /* @@ -1096,7 +1096,7 @@ static void cls_uart_init(struct channel_t *ch) writeb(UART_FCR_ENABLE_FIFO | UART_FCR_CLEAR_RCVR | UART_FCR_CLEAR_XMIT, &ch->ch_cls_uart->isr_fcr); - udelay(10); + usleep_range(10, 20); ch->ch_flags |= (CH_FIFO_ENABLED | CH_TX_FIFO_EMPTY | CH_TX_FIFO_LWM); -- 2.10.2 _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
