On 07/31/13 16:44, Timur Tabi wrote:
On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 2:16 AM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
What do you do here if jiffies aren't incrementing (i.e
interrupts are disabled). The time_before() check won't work
there and it would be nice if we were able to use this in such
situations. I think powerpc gets around this by reading the
hardware timer directly?
I believe that jiffies is always a global variable. It should behave
the same on PowerPC as on other architectures.
Yes it's global but it doesn't increment while interrupts are off.
The answer to your question is that you should not use
spin_event_timeout() in interrupt context, because it yields.
If it yields why are we using udelay? Why not usleep_range()? It would
be useful to have a variant that worked in interrupt context and it
looked like that was almost possible.
BTW, couldn't we skip the first patch and just use usecs_to_jiffies()?
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-m68k" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
