All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [Kernel-janitors] Re: sb1000.c::nicedelay() (msleep)
@ 2004-07-09  0:07 Steven N. Hirsch
  2004-07-11 10:19 ` maximilian attems
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Steven N. Hirsch @ 2004-07-09  0:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: kernel-janitors

[-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 576 bytes --]

On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:

> So, this function (drivers/net/sb1000.c::nicedelay()) takes as parameter some
> value in usecs (which is also the name of the parameter). Then, it sleeps for
> 1 second (schedule_timeout(HZ)) regardless of the parameter. Is this desired?
> If so, I will replace the calls (all 3 of them) with msleep(). Or, should the
> passed in values (60000, 30000 and 200000) actually be being used and not
> ignored? Thanks.

Are these cards still being used?  I switched to 2-way cable almost (3) 
years ago and haven't looked back.  



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 167 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: [Kernel-janitors] Re: sb1000.c::nicedelay() (msleep)
  2004-07-09  0:07 [Kernel-janitors] Re: sb1000.c::nicedelay() (msleep) Steven N. Hirsch
@ 2004-07-11 10:19 ` maximilian attems
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: maximilian attems @ 2004-07-11 10:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: kernel-janitors

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 826 bytes --]

On Thu, 08 Jul 2004, Steven N. Hirsch wrote:

> On Thu, 8 Jul 2004, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> 
> > So, this function (drivers/net/sb1000.c::nicedelay()) takes as parameter some
> > value in usecs (which is also the name of the parameter). Then, it sleeps for
> > 1 second (schedule_timeout(HZ)) regardless of the parameter. Is this desired?
> > If so, I will replace the calls (all 3 of them) with msleep(). Or, should the
> > passed in values (60000, 30000 and 200000) actually be being used and not
> > ignored? Thanks.
> 
> Are these cards still being used?  I switched to 2-way cable almost (3) 
> years ago and haven't looked back.  

there is no active MAINTAINER listed,
but the cards were widespread and the driver received fixes for 2.6,
you may want to ask your question on linux-net@vger.kernel.org.

a++ maks



[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 167 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2004-07-11 10:19 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-07-09  0:07 [Kernel-janitors] Re: sb1000.c::nicedelay() (msleep) Steven N. Hirsch
2004-07-11 10:19 ` maximilian attems

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.