linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: possible overflow in __udelay

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>