From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933233AbdKATJW (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2017 15:09:22 -0400 Received: from mail-io0-f196.google.com ([209.85.223.196]:51593 "EHLO mail-io0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932209AbdKATJV (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Nov 2017 15:09:21 -0400 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+RpXhyHNBg0C2DYGT0xu/zkwC0MmSJITDOCzRLz57yZQL1QYMF2cLVkM2sLNhCgkYkYY3cWLJosEkCHcmZR1oI= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4b707ce0-6067-ab36-e167-1acf348d26bf@free.fr> References: <20171101175325.2557ce85@alans-desktop> <4b707ce0-6067-ab36-e167-1acf348d26bf@free.fr> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2017 12:09:19 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: AFr2IluUfm9OBFzuomAMFHwrmPA Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] Improving udelay/ndelay on platforms where that is possible To: Marc Gonzalez Cc: Alan Cox , LKML , Linux ARM , Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Peter Zijlstra , John Stultz , Douglas Anderson , Nicolas Pitre , Mark Rutland , Will Deacon , Jonathan Austin , Arnd Bergmann , Kevin Hilman , Russell King , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , Mason Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Marc Gonzalez wrote: > > By default, ndelay is implemented in terms of udelay. That's very much *NOT* the case. Yes, there is a *fallback* for when somebody doesn't do ndelay() at all, but that doesn't make it the default. It's just a "the architecture didn't implement ndelay at all, we'll work around it". So stop this idiocy already. About half of what I've seen in this thread has been pure garbage. Linus