Re: [v2] timers: Fix usleep_range() in the context of wake_up_process()

2016-10-12 Thread Guenter Roeck
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 09:27:35AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > drivers/iio/accel/kxcjk-1013.c: kxcjk1013_runtime_resume() > > drivers/iio/accel/bmc150-accel-core.c:bmc150_accel_runtime_resume() > >

Re: [v2] timers: Fix usleep_range() in the context of wake_up_process()

2016-10-12 Thread Guenter Roeck
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 09:27:35AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > drivers/iio/accel/kxcjk-1013.c: kxcjk1013_runtime_resume() > > drivers/iio/accel/bmc150-accel-core.c:bmc150_accel_runtime_resume() > >

Re: [v2] timers: Fix usleep_range() in the context of wake_up_process()

2016-10-12 Thread Doug Anderson
Hi, On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > drivers/iio/accel/kxcjk-1013.c: kxcjk1013_runtime_resume() > drivers/iio/accel/bmc150-accel-core.c:bmc150_accel_runtime_resume() > drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c:mma8452_runtime_resume() >

Re: [v2] timers: Fix usleep_range() in the context of wake_up_process()

2016-10-12 Thread Doug Anderson
Hi, On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote: > drivers/iio/accel/kxcjk-1013.c: kxcjk1013_runtime_resume() > drivers/iio/accel/bmc150-accel-core.c:bmc150_accel_runtime_resume() > drivers/iio/accel/mma8452.c:mma8452_runtime_resume() > drivers/iio/accel/mma9551_core.c:mma9551_sleep()

Re: [v2] timers: Fix usleep_range() in the context of wake_up_process()

2016-10-12 Thread Guenter Roeck
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 02:04:02PM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote: > Users of usleep_range() expect that it will _never_ return in less time > than the minimum passed parameter. However, nothing in any of the code > ensures this. Specifically: > > usleep_range() => do_usleep_range() =>

Re: [v2] timers: Fix usleep_range() in the context of wake_up_process()

2016-10-12 Thread Guenter Roeck
On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 02:04:02PM -0700, Douglas Anderson wrote: > Users of usleep_range() expect that it will _never_ return in less time > than the minimum passed parameter. However, nothing in any of the code > ensures this. Specifically: > > usleep_range() => do_usleep_range() =>