| To: | linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: possible overflow in __udelay |
| From: | Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> |
| Date: | Thu, 08 Jul 2004 00:12:07 +0900 (JST) |
| In-reply-to: | <20040707.235723.74756758.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> |
| Original-recipient: | rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org |
| References: | <20040701.211456.59461492.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> <20040707.235723.74756758.anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> |
| Sender: | linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org |
>>>>> On Wed, 07 Jul 2004 23:57:23 +0900 (JST), Atsushi Nemoto >>>>> <anemo@mba.ocn.ne.jp> said: anemo> I believe, for example, mdelay(10) does not work properly on anemo> most MIPS ports (except for DECSTATION and JAZZ which have anemo> smaller HZ value). Oops, mdelay(10) should work. But mdelay(5) (mdelay(MAX_UDELAY_MS)) does not work. --- Atsushi Nemoto |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: possible overflow in __udelay, Atsushi Nemoto |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] MIPS getdomainname() off by 1;, Ralf Baechle |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: possible overflow in __udelay, Atsushi Nemoto |
| Next by Thread: | 2.4 pci_dma_sync_sg fix, Atsushi Nemoto |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |