On 8/25/2016 11:40 AM, Andrew F. Davis wrote:
When the inputed usec is too large we process it in chunks of CONFIG_WD_PERIOD size. Subtracting this from usec until usec is zero. If usec is not an integer multiple of CONFIG_WD_PERIOD it will underflow and the condition will not become false when it should. Fix this logic.
Signed-off-by: Andrew F. Davis afd@ti.com
lib/time.c | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/time.c b/lib/time.c index f37150f..4ec3cb9 100644 --- a/lib/time.c +++ b/lib/time.c @@ -145,14 +145,14 @@ void __weak __udelay(unsigned long usec)
void udelay(unsigned long usec) {
- ulong kv;
ulong kv = usec > CONFIG_WD_PERIOD ? CONFIG_WD_PERIOD : usec;
ulong elapsed = 0;
do { WATCHDOG_RESET();
kv = usec > CONFIG_WD_PERIOD ? CONFIG_WD_PERIOD : usec;__udelay (kv);usec -= kv;- } while(usec);
__udelay(kv);elapsed += kv;- } while (elapsed < usec);
}
void mdelay(unsigned long msec)
The original code looks fine to me. Can you give an example of failure ? ie. If udelay is passed value of CONFIG_WD_PERIOD+1, the udelay sequence will be
udelay(CONFIG_WD_PERIOD) udelay(1)
whereas the need code does udelay(CONFIG_WD_PERIOD) udelay(CONFIG_WD_PERIOD)