* Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@xxxxxxxxx> [081027 09:22]: > Jarkko Nikula wrote: >> I would rather, if there is no need for such a long delay like >> OMAP_I2C_TIMEOUT, remove that time_after and msleep(1) stuff and >> just loop few iterations with udelay(1). Zero thinked & tested diff >> attached. > > I just though of allowing the reset to take longer as I have no idea how > long it could take, let alone other versions of OMAP. > >> I would say that ndelay(1) just doesn't look relevant to < 1 GHz >> cpus :-) > > Good point. On ARM ndelay(1) seems to be equal to udelay(1) at the moment. > > I actually just removed the ndelay(1) and again, "delay" won't get past > 1 if I print it after the loop. > > It'd be nice to know how it works on other OMAP versions before making > such changes. :-) Let me know if you come up with a refreshed patch for this, ignoring for now. Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
