regulator: use usleep_range() instead of mdelay()/udelay()
PATCH 1/1 regulator: use usleep_range() instead of mdelay()/udelay()
From 00753f3d48c4b6c45c1778c3e37bc9949ed79e77 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dmitry Antipov <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 11:01:42 +0400
Subject: [PATCH] regulator: use usleep_range() instead of mdelay()/udelay()
--- drivers/regulator/core.c | 7 +------ 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
drivers/regulator/core.c +1 -6
@@ -1379,12 +1379,7 @@ static int _regulator_enable(struct regulator_dev *rdev)trace_regulator_enable_delay (rdev_get_name (rdev)); -if (delay >=1000 ) { -mdelay (delay /1000 ); -udelay (delay %1000 ); - }else if (delay) { -udelay (delay); - } +usleep_range (delay, delay +1000 );trace_regulator_enable_complete (rdev_get_name (rdev));
Signature · 1 line
1.7.7.4
Quoted 4 lines · Dmitry Antipov
From
00753f3d48c4b6c45c1778c3e37bc9949ed79e77Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Dmitry Antipov <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 11:01:42 +0400
Subject: [PATCH] regulator: useusleep_range()instead of mdelay()/udelay()
Follow the instructions in Documentation/SubmittingPatches.
drivers/regulator/core.c static int _regulator_enable(struct regulator_dev *rdev) · line 1382
Quoted 7 lines
drivers/regulator/core.c +1
-6-if (delay >=1000 ) { -mdelay (delay /1000 ); -udelay (delay %1000 ); - }else if (delay) { -udelay (delay); - } +usleep_range (delay, delay +1000 );
These two aren't obviously equivalent in several respects and you haven't provided any explanation for what you're trying to accomplish.