From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18DD53AEF3A; Wed, 16 Sep 2026 09:54:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789552446; cv=none; b=jNVsJKQW4dAk6cR/VE7HYlzRZWKEODXMp8qecswRDE8Rua9/rkbqVxl5xcuHZdrsycrdM3HQOvJ6rWOd0KsDNA/RzgCpXkSYDTEaTmi1hQCB28wBuW+qTiyAOaYt/fQUlUj7Y8gQZpiaaQan86DPPS6xPvtDXkpOrdccuz7goQM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789552446; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gU28K/TBmhCpoW3RpgGeEwSRVwR0d59zct58qf7aOmM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=hNklmmON2tBZEtQK86R/o+qu2u1heAgGy4uaDGGE0QFcXeVFSMNkNSNY+Yw402Pc/dlxaDMUZzN0CInHij7krziaxxAtOHr/7jRadokoQibvzlewG8+WorRo5YxM2qlg0D52arc2FLKQFGG+Ir/sy5sZIaG7zAuzAveCKW7wrSw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=fINTCHd2; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=XTBEJa4S; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="fINTCHd2"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="XTBEJa4S" From: Nam Cao DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1789552436; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=gU28K/TBmhCpoW3RpgGeEwSRVwR0d59zct58qf7aOmM=; b=fINTCHd2rV5qr8hjmNiqsQ4kOatkIK9D9rw4UdLHoz2bQS/o6CllgkB3r7yfaRgZ8h8A/N 9ZWUJUXswF3y/wEMSvF97Bcyi5ijZpITTAFGs1xKXXZUn6JgFMLlQ4HY6hrY8Ak4c4wJ1R HdOMPTC+Fm9QLPckwARGA0qcR6vSsJYONMDfHSOc9mAKt/0ceLsusKTE2zkREdEMfFRZax VMAvNojX/ixR/MKY2wJiCqMZPv/zodO4iz8BgAN/6Q4H0UdFxOgNCoeYOGhE8CyFNDoyja MGAcIOtkkok0yiGfD4arKl5sEkWhUsHG9KFJwKsp8HRhSCLSOq9a3W1lZ/ht6g== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1789552436; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=gU28K/TBmhCpoW3RpgGeEwSRVwR0d59zct58qf7aOmM=; b=XTBEJa4S1t4j/hKUlrlaaDS2takijVXH7QjcDoSKns0Jg3CN6SgDUy41SQB8W5H5heoKF3 zNiHzB2t8we1GiAg== To: Omer PALA , andy@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Cc: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: fbtft: fb_upd161704: replace udelay with usleep_range In-Reply-To: <20260916093928.52057-1-palaomer100@gmail.com> References: <20260916093928.52057-1-palaomer100@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 11:53:55 +0200 Message-ID: <87ecet5xos.fsf@yellow.woof> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Omer PALA writes: > Replace udelay() calls with usleep_range() > to avoid busy-waiting and allow the > scheduler to sleep during delays. > > Signed-off-by: Omer PALA This change cannot be accepted unless it has been validated with hardware. Btw, I am curious why we have these udelay(). Can we remove them? Nam