On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 10:36:07PM +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 04:04:44PM -0500, Seth Forshee wrote:
> > > +
> > > + while (i && (gwr & 0x01)) {
> > > + inb(gmux_data->iostart + GMUX_PORT_READ);
> > > + gwr = inb(gmux_data->iostart + GMUX_PORT_WRITE);
> > > + msleep(100);
> >
> > Wouldn't it make more sense if the msleep was before reading the port
> > again? Otherwise there's no substantial dely between the first and
> > second times we read it.
>
> Mm. I'm doing the same as the ACPI implementation - it may be that
> reading GMUX_PORT_READ triggers the update of GMUX_PORT_WRITE? Hard to
> know without the docs.
Indeed. I do find the structure of the loop to be odd, but I suppose the
safest approach is to follow the only known working implementation we
have. In that case ...
Acked-by: Seth Forshee <[email protected]>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
