On 6/29/23 09:53, Alex Deucher wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 12:47 AM Srinivasan Shanmugam
> <srinivasan.shanmu...@amd.com> wrote:
>>
>> Fixes the following category of checkpatch warning:
>>
>> WARNING: msleep < 20ms can sleep for up to 20ms; see
>> Documentation/timers/timers-howto.rst
>> + msleep(10);
>>
>> Cc: Rodrigo Siqueira <rodrigo.sique...@amd.com>
>> Cc: Aurabindo Pillai <aurabindo.pil...@amd.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Srinivasan Shanmugam <srinivasan.shanmu...@amd.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_helpers.c | 2 +-
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_helpers.c
>> b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_helpers.c
>> index c13b70629be6..a6be04ad387f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_helpers.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/display/amdgpu_dm/amdgpu_dm_helpers.c
>> @@ -643,7 +643,7 @@ static bool execute_synaptics_rc_command(struct
>> drm_dp_aux *aux,
>> if (rc_cmd == cmd)
>> // active is 0
>> break;
>> - msleep(10);
>> + msleep(20);
>
> This doesn't seem like the right fix. The warning seems somewhat
> bogus to begin with. If the length really matters, I guess we should
> use usleep_range(), but if not, I don't see any reason not to leave it
> as is. Sure, it might sleep longer, but it might not. Better to have
> the code stay as is since 10 was presumably the intended sleep time.
>
I agree.
Harry
> Alex
>
>
>> }
>>
>> // read rc result
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>>
