Re: [PATCH] Add Amstrad Delta NAND support.

[Jonathan McDowell <noodles@earth.li>]

On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 10:32:37AM +0100, David Vrabel wrote:
> Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> > On Thu, May 18, 2006 at 06:57:28PM +0200, Jörn Engel wrote:
> >> On Thu, 18 May 2006 17:09:41 +0100, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> >>> +	omap_writew(0, (OMAP_MPUIO_BASE + OMAP_MPUIO_IO_CNTL));
> >>                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> Could that be done in a macro?
> > 
> > Is there any benefit to doing so?
> > 
> >>> +	udelay(0.04);
> >> Floating point in the kernel?
> > 
> > Not quite. udelay is a macro on ARM so this ends up as an integer before
> > it ever hits a function call. In an ideal world I'd use "ndelay(40);"
> > but that would result in a delay of over 1µs as ARM doesn't have ndelay
> > defined so we hit the generic fallback.
> 
> Use instead:
> 
> /* delay for at least 40 ns */
> udelay(1);

Using "ndelay(40);" here would seem to make more sense; it's equivalent
at present and means that once I or someone else provided an ndelay
implementation for ARM the driver wouldn't need changed to take
advantage of it.

J.

-- 
                 /------------------------------------\
                 |      Ships log... erm... one.      |
                 | http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/ |
                 \------------------------------------/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/