RFC: const_udelay in 018-delay functions patch

Rusty Russell
Wed, 18 Apr 2007 13:02:27 -0000

On Tue, 2006-10-24 at 22:11 -0700, Zachary Amsden wrote:
> So I implemented udelay and ndelay through a single paravirt_op,
> const_udelay, instead of having either two separate paravirt-ops for
> udelay or ndelay, or a redundant const_udelay paravirt_op.  Anybody have
> any objection to reworking the patch this way?

Seems saner, but I'm not sure why x86 has an I/O delay separate from
udelay to start with?

Comments:

> +#if defined(CONFIG_PARAVIRT) && !defined(USE_REAL_IO)
> +#include <asm/paravirt.h>
> +#else

USE_REAL_IO? Is this defined anywhere?  Or just future-proofing?

Rusty.
--
Help! Save Australia from the worst of the DMCA: http://linux.org.au/law