Re: [PATCH] staging: rts5208: Replace delay function.

[Karolina Stolarek <karolina.stolarek@intel.com>]

On 18.10.2023 12:28, Julia Lawall wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2023, Karolina Stolarek wrote:
> 
>> On 18.10.2023 09:45, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 09:32:46AM +0200, Karolina Stolarek wrote:
>>>> On 18.10.2023 09:03, Julia Lawall wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 17 Oct 2023, kenechukwu maduechesi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Replace udelay() with usleep_range() for more precise delay handling.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Reported by checkpatch:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CHECK: usleep_range is preferred over udelay
>>>>>
>>>>> This message is typically not a good candidate for outreachy patches,
>>>>> because you need access to the device to be sure that any change is
>>>>> correct.
>>>>
>>>> Could we add a paragraph on how to pick good checkpatch.pl error to fix to
>>>> the Outreachyfirstpatch docs? This could go to "Find a driver to clean up"
>>>> section, for example.
>>>
>>> The ability to find a "good" error changes over time, so this might be
>>> hard to do.
>>
>> I agree, but we can all agree that experimenting with udelay during Outreachy
>> is not a good idea, and people should know about it
> 
> In general, I think that it is better in the contribution period to do the
> wrong thing and then learn about why it is wrong, but this case comes up
> over and over, and it is always not the right thing to do, so I added an
> appropriate explanation.  Thanks for the suggestion.

Absolutely. Thanks for the docs update. Still, one thing -- is empty 
section after "Some drivers that are on their way out of the kernel 
are:" intentional?

All the best,
Karolina

> 
> julia
> 
>>
>> All the best,
>> Karolina
>>
>>>
>>> good luck!
>>>
>>> greg k-h
>>