Hi, Frans, It can only be delay for the firmware implementation now.
Hn.chen -----Original Message----- From: Frans Klaver [mailto:franskla...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 6:02 PM To: Hn Chen Cc: linux-in...@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Dmitry Torokhov Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] Fix the resolution issue in ChromeOS On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Hn Chen <hn.c...@weidahitech.com> wrote: > Hi, Frans, > >> Alright, I was just wondering. Seems like a waste to be waiting for >> something that's already finished ;-). >> There's of course a risk that times may fluctuate between firmware versions. >> Did you take that into account in the code? >> Or is there a hard maximum time for these operations defined for the >> firmware? > Thanks for your reminding. > After I check with the firmware guy, I will change the value of delay. > What we do here is to read the data from flash and calculate their > checksum and will cost about 6ms for 1024 bytes. So there is a delay for 10 > ms per 1024 bytes. > But in some situation, the controller will change it's running > frequency(like do noise immunity), 10ms could be too margin. Any chance this sort of thing could be detected? N�����r��y����b�X��ǧv�^�){.n�+����{����zX����ܨ}���Ơz�&j:+v�������zZ+��+zf���h���~����i���z� �w���?�����&�)ߢf��^jǫy�m��@A�a��� 0��h���i
