From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Claude Code Review Bot To: dri-devel-reviews@example.com Subject: Claude review: Re: [PATCH] staging: fbtft: fb_ra8875: replace udelays with usleep_range Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2026 12:54:37 +1000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <2026022515-booth-silent-f3bd@gregkh> References: <2026022515-booth-silent-f3bd@gregkh> <2026022515-booth-silent-f3bd@gregkh> X-Mailer: Claude Code Patch Reviewer Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Patch Review **Status**: Superseded by v2. The v1 approach of `usleep_range(100, 120)` is functionally correct =E2=80= =94 this is a non-atomic context (confirmed by the SPI write calls surround= ing the delays). However, for a 100us delay, `fsleep()` is the more modern = and idiomatic choice since it automatically picks the right mechanism based= on duration. The 20us upper bound (20% range) is reasonable but a bit narr= ow for a 100us delay. This patch was correctly revised in v2. --- Generated by Claude Code Patch Reviewer