On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 9:48 PM, Grant Likely wrote:
> First, udelay just burns time, and if the delay is too large, then the
> it is wasting time that could be used for something else. That being
> said, it needs to be balanced with the context switch overhead. If
> the udelay() is less than do
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 9:12 PM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Jon Smirl 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 manu
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 6:44 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Timur Tabi wrote:
>> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
>>
>>> - spin_event_timeout(0, 10, 0, rc);
>>> + spin_event_timeout(0, 10, 0);
>>> out_8(®s->op0, MPC52xx_PSC_OP_RES);
>>
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:01 PM, Jon Smirl 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 gu
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:53 PM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
>
>> Because Grant didn't want me doing udelay(50) just to delay things in
>> order to give the AC97 controller time to initialize. Your function
>> lets me loop on cpu_relax() for 50us.
>
> But
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
> Because Grant didn't want me doing udelay(50) just to delay things in
> order to give the AC97 controller time to initialize. Your function
> lets me loop on cpu_relax() for 50us.
But udelay() calls HMT_low(), which is like cpu_relax().
--
Ti
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 8:38 PM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
>
>> - spin_event_timeout(0, 10, 0, rc);
>> + spin_event_timeout(0, 10, 0);
>> out_8(®s->op0, MPC52xx_PSC_OP_RES);
>> - spin_event_timeout(0, 50, 0, rc);
>> + spin
On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:25 PM, Jon Smirl wrote:
> - spin_event_timeout(0, 10, 0, rc);
> + spin_event_timeout(0, 10, 0);
> out_8(®s->op0, MPC52xx_PSC_OP_RES);
> - spin_event_timeout(0, 50, 0, rc);
> + spin_event_timeout(0, 50, 0);
Jon, I'm still hoping you'll expl
The function signature for spin_event_timeout() has changed in version V9.
Adjust the mpc5200 AC97 driver to use the new function.
Signed-off-by: Jon Smirl
---
sound/soc/fsl/mpc5200_psc_ac97.c | 30 ++
1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a
