Hi Jani, Thanks for your patch!
On Thu, 26 Jun 2025 at 16:51, Jani Nikula <[email protected]> wrote: > Sometimes it's necessary to poll with long sleeps, and the accuracy of > usleep_range() is overkill. Use the flexible sleep helper fsleep() for > sleeping in the read_poll_timeout() family of macros to automatically > choose the appropriate method of waiting. > > Functionally there are a few consequences for existing users: > > - 10 us and shorter sleeps will use usleep() instead of s/usleep/udelay/. > usleep_range(). Presumably this will not be an issue. Note that udelay() does not sleep, but loops. > > - When it leads to a slack of less than 25%, msleep() will be used > instead of usleep_range(). Presumably this will not be an issue, given > the sleeps will be longer in this case. > > - Otherwise, the usleep_range() slack gets switched from the begin of > the range to the end of the range, i.e. [sleep/2+1..sleep] -> > [sleep..sleep+sleep/2]. In theory, this could be an issue in some > cases, but difficult to determine before this hits the real world. > > Signed-off-by: Jani Nikula <[email protected]> > Not really sure who to Cc, given MAINTAINERS doesn't match this. Adding > some past committers. Oh well ;-) Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected] In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
