Ivo van Doorn wrote:
This will add a comment for the 1us delay which is taken after the pulse has been switched. The 1us delay is based on the specifications so that should be made clear. Signed-off-by: Ivo van Doorn <IvDoorn@xxxxxxxxx> --- diff --git a/drivers/misc/eeprom_93cx6.c b/drivers/misc/eeprom_93cx6.c index a948ddc..8c8b43f 100644 --- a/drivers/misc/eeprom_93cx6.c +++ b/drivers/misc/eeprom_93cx6.c @@ -39,6 +39,12 @@ static inline void eeprom_93cx6_pulse_high(struct eeprom_93cx6 *eeprom) { eeprom->reg_data_clock = 1; eeprom->register_write(eeprom); + + /* + * Add a short delay for the pulse to work. + * According to the specifications the minimal time + * should be 450ns so a 1us delay is sufficient. + */ udelay(1); }@@ -46,6 +52,12 @@ static inline void eeprom_93cx6_pulse_low(struct eeprom_93cx6 *eeprom){ eeprom->reg_data_clock = 0; eeprom->register_write(eeprom); + + /* + * Add a short delay for the pulse to work. + * According to the specifications the minimal time + * should be 450ns so a 1us delay is sufficient. + */ udelay(1);
why not ndelay(450)? Jeff - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
