Commit cadd486c authored by David Fries's avatar David Fries Committed by Linus Torvalds
Browse files

W1: ds1wm.c msleep for reset



Like the previous w1_io.c reset coments and msleep patch, I don't have the
hardware to verify the change, but I think it is safe.  It also helps to
see a comment like this in the code.  "We'll wait a bit longer just to be
sure." If they are going to calculate delaying 324.9us, but actually delay
500us, why not just give up the CPU and sleep?  This is designed for a
battery powered ARM system, avoiding busywaiting has to be good for
battery life.

I sent a request for testers March 7, 2008 to the Linux kernel mailing
list and two developers who have patches for ds1wm.c, but I didn't get
any respons.
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid Fries <david@fries.net>
Signed-off-by: default avatarEvgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru>
Signed-off-by: default avatarAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: default avatarLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
parent 8e3dae2b
......@@ -160,8 +160,10 @@ static int ds1wm_reset(struct ds1wm_data *ds1wm_data)
* 625 us - 60 us - 240 us - 100 ns = 324.9 us
*
* We'll wait a bit longer just to be sure.
* Was udelay(500), but if it is going to busywait the cpu that long,
* might as well come back later.
*/
udelay(500);
msleep(1);
ds1wm_write_register(ds1wm_data, DS1WM_INT_EN,
DS1WM_INTEN_ERBF | DS1WM_INTEN_ETMT | DS1WM_INTEN_EPD |
......
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment