> As I've said, if we aren't going to use this, then the only solution is > to completely omit the msleep() there and just say "sod you to running > anything else for 20ms while this driver busy-spins." That's > ultimately the safe thing to do, and at the moment I see no other > alternative there. Anyone having this argument is also right now peeing into the wind. Quite a few console drivers do this including some the big name x86 ones. We don't seem to be getting any resulting problem reports. Architecturally we really need a way to help console drivers separate the civilised acceleration friendly, lock friendly output paths from printk. That's the real fix, but a whole different matter to solve cleanly. Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
