Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-92642-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2024 23:44:14 +0800
Message-ID: <87frx4r8dt.wl-me@linux.beauty>
From: Li Chen <me@linux.beauty>
To: Andy Whitcroft <apw@canonical.com>, Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>, Dwaipayan Ray <dwaipayanray1@gmail.com>, Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/1] Guiding Use of ssleep over msleep for Whole-Second Delays
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue)
 FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Goj=F2?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0
 Emacs/29.2 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII


This change particularly targets replacing msleep() with ssleep() for
delays that are clear multiples of 1000ms, enhancing code semantics and
readability.

I'm contemplating a kernel-wide update to conform to this practice,
pending community feedback. While a sed script
(like '/\bmsleep\s*\(\s*([0-9]+000)\s*\);/{s/\bmsleep\s*\(\s*([0-9]+)000\s*\);/ssleep(\1);/g}')
could automate this, I'm cautious of potential implications and seek
your thoughts on both the patch and the idea of a broad codebase update.

Li Chen (1):
  checkpatch: Add warning for msleep with durations suitable for ssleep

 scripts/checkpatch.pl | 10 ++++++++++
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)

-- 
2.44.0