Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1541144

Re: [PATCH RFC] [media] s5k6aa: set usleep_range greater 0

From Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH RFC] [media] s5k6aa: set usleep_range greater 0
Date 2016-12-13 16:00 +0100
Message-ID <sNWIF-2q3-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <sNUxb-1bk-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <sNKxP-3oy-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <sNUxb-1bk-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <sNVWi-29W-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

Hi Laurent,

On 12/13/2016 03:10 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> As pointed out by Ian Arkver, the datasheet states the delay should be >50µs. 
> Would it make sense to reduce the sleep duration to (3000, 4000) for instance 
> (or possibly even lower), instead of increasing it ?

Theoretically it would make sense, I believe the delay call should really
be part of the set_power callback.  I think it is safe to decrease the
delay value now, the boards using that driver have been dropped with commit

commit ca9143501c30a2ce5886757961408488fac2bb4c
ARM: EXYNOS: Remove unused board files

As far as I am concerned you can do whatever you want with that delay
call, remove it or decrease value, whatever helps to stop triggering
warnings from the static analysis tools.

--
Thanks,
Sylwester

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH RFC] [media] s5k6aa: set usleep_range greater 0 Nicholas Mc Guire <hofrat@osadl.org> - 2016-12-13 03:00 +0100
  Re: [PATCH RFC] [media] s5k6aa: set usleep_range greater 0 Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@iki.fi> - 2016-12-13 10:50 +0100
    Re: [PATCH RFC] [media] s5k6aa: set usleep_range greater 0 Ian Arkver <ian.arkver.dev@gmail.com> - 2016-12-13 11:20 +0100
      Re: [PATCH RFC] [media] s5k6aa: set usleep_range greater 0 Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@iki.fi> - 2016-12-13 12:00 +0100
  Re: [PATCH RFC] [media] s5k6aa: set usleep_range greater 0 Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com> - 2016-12-13 13:40 +0100
    Re: [PATCH RFC] [media] s5k6aa: set usleep_range greater 0 Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> - 2016-12-13 15:10 +0100
      Re: [PATCH RFC] [media] s5k6aa: set usleep_range greater 0 Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com> - 2016-12-13 16:00 +0100
        Re: [PATCH RFC] [media] s5k6aa: set usleep_range greater 0 Nicholas Mc Guire <der.herr@hofr.at> - 2016-12-15 02:20 +0100
          Re: [PATCH RFC] [media] s5k6aa: set usleep_range greater 0 Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@samsung.com> - 2016-12-15 18:50 +0100

csiph-web