From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Anand Moon <linux.amoon@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 May 2021 00:10:25 +0530
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] pci: pcie_dw_rockchip: Use udelay instead of msleep
In-Reply-To: <YIhlq6C4nyTuF1Hu@mone.fritz.box>
References: <20210426132632.10221-1-linux.amoon@gmail.com>
 <20210426132632.10221-3-linux.amoon@gmail.com>
 <YIcdx6MZ02IKm7ni@mone.fritz.box>
 <CANAwSgRiLTSyo5Hvex7vO=-L+8-ogtqTUXA01ZLqNUF2oF2a1g@mail.gmail.com>
 <YIhlq6C4nyTuF1Hu@mone.fritz.box>
Message-ID: <CANAwSgQfadtTGz31H12BB-7Akr+KyTLRoxpiz-kw8ooGK5bSbQ@mail.gmail.com>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Hi Patrick,

On Wed, 28 Apr 2021 at 00:57, Patrick Wildt <patrick@blueri.se> wrote:
>
> Am Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 11:11:19AM +0530 schrieb Anand Moon:
> > hi Patrick,
> >
> > On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 at 01:38, Patrick Wildt <patrick@blueri.se> wrote:
> > >
> > > Am Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 01:26:32PM +0000 schrieb Anand Moon:
> > > > Use udelay instead of msleep fix the below warning.
> > >
> > > You sure that's correct? the m in msleep means milli, while the u
> > > in udelay means micro.  That's a factor of 1000 of a difference.
> > >
> > Thanks for your review comments.
> >
> > Most of the u-boot driver prefers udelay and usleep_range internally
> > calls udelay.
> >
> > I don't have the HW to test and verify.
> >
> > -Anand
>
> Sure, I'm not complaining about that.  My point is that if you pass
> e. g. 8 milliseconds to a function that takes microseconds, you need
> to add the factor.
>
> Not good: msleep(1000) -> udelay(1000)
> Much better: msleep(1000) -> udelay(1000 * 1000)
>
> Which also means that you either have to rename PERST_WAIT_MS and change
> its value, or do udelay(PERST_WAIT_MS * 1000)

Thanks for this tip, can we use mdelay as sugged above.
.
static inline void mdelay(unsigned long msec)
{
        udelay(1000 * msec);
}

Thanks
-Anand