On Sun, 2003-08-03 at 18:41, Ralf Baechle wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 01, 2003 at 06:49:08PM -0700, Pete Popov wrote:
> > Looks like the latest udelay in 2.4 is borked. Anyway else notice that
> > problem? I did a 10 sec test: mdelay works, udelay is broken, at least
> > for the CPU and toolchain I'm using.
> That just doesn't make sense. Mdelay is based on udelay so if udelay
> is broken mdelay should be broken, too.
I think the problem may be occurring when udelay is used with very large
values, like 10000. I've told the developer that that's not recommended
and to use mdelays in that case.