On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Jon Smirl <jonsm...@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 _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
