27 May
2009
27 May
'09
5:12 a.m.
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Jon Smirl jonsmirl@gmail.com wrote:
Then why did you need to make your routine that calls cpu_relax()?
That gets called only if delay == 0. udelay(0) is a no-op, so if the caller specifies no delay, then I need to manually call cpu_relax().
I don't know what goes on in the guts of HMT_low() and cpu_relax(), when you guys decide which one I should use let me know and I can adjust the patch.
Grant, I don't see any reason why "udelay(50)" is unacceptable.
--
Timur Tabi
Linux kernel developer at Freescale