* John W. Linville <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [2008-08-25 15:08]: > There are "udelay(2300)" calls in phy.c and hw.c. How important is > that exact number? Could those be replaced by mdelay(3) instead? > > Of course, looking in include/linux/delay.h, mdelay(3) may still > translate to __bad_udelay on arm. mdelay(3) compiles on ARM, so replacing the udelay(2300) with mdelay(3) might be an option. (I don't have the hardware to test though.) -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- 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
