On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 4:41 PM, David Riley wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I was wondering if there were any comments to this patch or if it was
> picked up somewhere?
So I guess it got left in a bit of an ambiguous spot. The basic point
of this test is to verify there is a sane counter time-based delay on
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 4:41 PM, David Riley davidri...@google.com wrote:
Hi,
I was wondering if there were any comments to this patch or if it was
picked up somewhere?
So I guess it got left in a bit of an ambiguous spot. The basic point
of this test is to verify there is a sane counter
Hi,
I was wondering if there were any comments to this patch or if it was
picked up somewhere?
Thanks,
Dave
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 3:30 PM, David Riley wrote:
> This change adds a module and a script that makes use of it to
> validate that udelay delays for at least as long as requested
> (as
Hi,
I was wondering if there were any comments to this patch or if it was
picked up somewhere?
Thanks,
Dave
On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 3:30 PM, David Riley davidri...@chromium.org wrote:
This change adds a module and a script that makes use of it to
validate that udelay delays for at least as
This change adds a module and a script that makes use of it to
validate that udelay delays for at least as long as requested
(as compared to ktime).
Changes since v1:
- allow udelay() to be 0.5% faster than requested as per feedback
David Riley (2):
kernel: time: Add udelay_test module to
This change adds a module and a script that makes use of it to
validate that udelay delays for at least as long as requested
(as compared to ktime).
Changes since v1:
- allow udelay() to be 0.5% faster than requested as per feedback
David Riley (2):
kernel: time: Add udelay_test module to
6 matches
Mail list logo
