Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 06 May 2020 17:04:06 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <20200506.170406.1373961782517203412.davem@davemloft.net>
To:     hkallweit1@gmail.com
Cc:     tglx@linutronix.de, corbet@lwn.net, nic_swsd@realtek.com,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] timer: add fsleep for flexible sleeping
From:   David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
In-Reply-To: <8e3c56ca-b43f-3877-0104-a1a279d5a6c5@gmail.com>
References: <8e3c56ca-b43f-3877-0104-a1a279d5a6c5@gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 23:26:21 +0200

> Sleeping for a certain amount of time requires use of different
> functions, depending on the time period.
> Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst explains when to use which
> function, and also checkpatch checks for some potentially
> problematic cases.
> 
> So let's create a helper that automatically chooses the appropriate
> sleep function -> fsleep(), for flexible sleeping
> Not sure why such a helper doesn't exist yet, or where the pitfall is,
> because it's a quite obvious idea.
> 
> If the delay is a constant, then the compiler should be able to ensure
> that the new helper doesn't create overhead. If the delay is not
> constant, then the new helper can save some code.
> 
> First user is the r8169 network driver. If nothing speaks against it,
> then this series could go through the netdev tree.

I haven't seen any objections voiced over the new fsleep helper, so
I've applied this series to net-next.

Thank you.