On 05/08/2018 10:04 PM, J Freyensee wrote:

          do {
-            tpm_msleep(TPM_POLL_SLEEP);
+            tpm_msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL);

I'm just curious why it was decided to still use tpm_msleep() here instead of usleep_range() which was used in the 2nd patch.

TPM_TIMEOUT_POLL is in msec i.e. 1 msec and usleep_range() is used only when timeout is needed in usecs.


Otherwise,

Acked-by: Jay Freyensee <why2jjj.li...@gmail.com>

Thanks !!

Thanks & Regards,
    - Nayna


Reply via email to