2022-10-18 15:14:57

by Tanjuate Brunostar

Subject: [PATCH] staging: rts5208: Replace instances of udelay by usleep_range

Replace the use of udelay by usleep_range as suggested by checkpatch:

CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay; see Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst
+ udelay(30);

CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay; see Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst
+ udelay(50);

Signed-off-by: Tanjuate Brunostar <[email protected]>
---
drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c b/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c
index 14449f8afad5..ae72437b5482 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c
@@ -3235,7 +3235,7 @@ static int ms_write_multiple_pages(struct rtsx_chip *chip, u16 old_blk,
return STATUS_FAIL;
}

- udelay(30);
+ usleep_range(30, 30);

rtsx_init_cmd(chip);

@@ -4157,7 +4157,7 @@ int mg_set_ICV(struct scsi_cmnd *srb, struct rtsx_chip *chip)

#ifdef MG_SET_ICV_SLOW
for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
- udelay(50);
+ usleep_range(50, 50);

rtsx_init_cmd(chip);

--
2.34.1

2022-10-20 04:55:24

by Joe Perches

Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: rts5208: Replace instances of udelay by usleep_range

On Tue, 2022-10-18 at 14:04 +0000, Tanjuate Brunostar wrote:
> Replace the use of udelay by usleep_range as suggested by checkpatch:
>
> CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay; see Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst
> + udelay(30);
[]
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c b/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c
[]
> @@ -3235,7 +3235,7 @@ static int ms_write_multiple_pages(struct rtsx_chip *chip, u16 old_blk,
> return STATUS_FAIL;
> }
>
> - udelay(30);
> + usleep_range(30, 30);

This isn't useful. Please read the Documentation/timers.

2022-10-20 06:46:48

by Tanjuate Brunostar

Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: rts5208: Replace instances of udelay by usleep_range

On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 5:40 AM Joe Perches <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2022-10-18 at 14:04 +0000, Tanjuate Brunostar wrote:
> > Replace the use of udelay by usleep_range as suggested by checkpatch:
> >
> > CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay; see Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst
> > + udelay(30);
> []
> > diff --git a/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c b/drivers/staging/rts5208/ms.c
> []
> > @@ -3235,7 +3235,7 @@ static int ms_write_multiple_pages(struct rtsx_chip *chip, u16 old_blk,
> > return STATUS_FAIL;
> > }
> >
> > - udelay(30);
> > + usleep_range(30, 30);
>
> >This isn't useful. Please read the Documentation/timers.

Yes I read the documentation and realized the changes were not necessary