Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751953AbcJKHRZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2016 03:17:25 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:52032 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751008AbcJKHRY (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Oct 2016 03:17:24 -0400 Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 09:14:38 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Douglas Anderson cc: John Stultz , Andreas Mohr , briannorris@chromium.org, huangtao@rock-chips.com, tony.xie@rock-chips.com, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] timers: Fix usleep_range() in the context of wake_up_process() In-Reply-To: <1476133442-17757-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org> Message-ID: References: <1476133442-17757-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 481 Lines: 17 On Mon, 10 Oct 2016, Douglas Anderson wrote: > Users of usleep_range() expect that it will _never_ return in less time > than the minimum passed parameter. However, nothing in any of the code > ensures this. Specifically: There is no such guarantee for that interface and never has been, so how did you make sure that none of the existing users is relying on this? You can't just can't just declare that all all of the users expect that and be done with it. Thanks, tglx