Re: [PATCH] iio: pressure: bm1390: replace short msleeps with usleep_range

[Hungyu Lin]

> I don't see the value either, unless there is a real problem the patch
> author has encountered. If there is a real world problem this is solving
> - please state it. My stance on fsleep() Vs. msleep() in ASYNC probes
> can be read from discussion (bikeshedding) between me and Nuno ;)
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/14a23df0e1828b72b8b03c358980fe08a12bb216.camel@xxxxxxxxx/
>

Hi Jonathan, Andy, Matti,

Thanks for the review.

My motivation was based on the BM1390 datasheet specifying a 1 ms
reset cancel wait time (tSC1).

For additional context, I contacted ROHM regarding the timing
requirement and received the following response from their sales
representative after consulting with their engineering team:

"The engineer confirmed that setting a delay longer than 1 ms does not
have any significant impact on subsequent operation."

Given this feedback and the comments in this thread, I agree that I do
not have evidence of any real-world issue caused by the existing
msleep(1) usage, nor a clear functional benefit from this change.

Thanks for the feedback.

Best regards,
Hungyu