On Tue, 17 Oct 2023, kenechukwu maduechesi wrote: > Replace udelay() with usleep_range() for more precise delay handling. > > Reported by checkpatch: > > CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay This message is typically not a good candidate for outreachy patches, because you need access to the device to be sure that any change is correct. julia > > Signed-off-by: kenechukwu maduechesi <maduechesik@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/staging/rts5208/sd.c | 10 +++++----- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rts5208/sd.c b/drivers/staging/rts5208/sd.c > index 74c4f476b3a4..059f99b0a727 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/rts5208/sd.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/rts5208/sd.c > @@ -865,7 +865,7 @@ static int sd_change_phase(struct rtsx_chip *chip, u8 sample_point, u8 tune_dir) > PHASE_CHANGE); > if (retval) > return retval; > - udelay(50); > + usleep_range(50); > retval = rtsx_write_register(chip, SD_VP_CTL, 0xFF, > PHASE_CHANGE | > PHASE_NOT_RESET | > @@ -877,14 +877,14 @@ static int sd_change_phase(struct rtsx_chip *chip, u8 sample_point, u8 tune_dir) > CHANGE_CLK, CHANGE_CLK); > if (retval) > return retval; > - udelay(50); > + usleep_range(50); > retval = rtsx_write_register(chip, SD_VP_CTL, 0xFF, > PHASE_NOT_RESET | > sample_point); > if (retval) > return retval; > } > - udelay(100); > + usleep_range(100); > > rtsx_init_cmd(chip); > rtsx_add_cmd(chip, WRITE_REG_CMD, SD_DCMPS_CTL, DCMPS_CHANGE, > @@ -918,7 +918,7 @@ static int sd_change_phase(struct rtsx_chip *chip, u8 sample_point, u8 tune_dir) > return retval; > } > > - udelay(50); > + usleep_range(50); > } > > retval = rtsx_write_register(chip, SD_CFG1, SD_ASYNC_FIFO_NOT_RST, 0); > @@ -1416,7 +1416,7 @@ static int sd_wait_data_idle(struct rtsx_chip *chip) > retval = STATUS_SUCCESS; > break; > } > - udelay(100); > + usleep_range(100); > } > dev_dbg(rtsx_dev(chip), "SD_DATA_STATE: 0x%02x\n", val); > > -- > 2.25.1 > > >
