From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
To: kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [Kernel-janitors] [PATCH] paride: replace schedule_timeout() with
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2004 18:10:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040720181003.GD2320@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040720180441.GA2320@us.ibm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1838 bytes --]
I would appreciate any comments from the janitors list. This is one (of
many) cases where I made a decision about replacing
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
schedule_timeout(some_time);
with
msleep(jiffies_to_msecs(some_time));
msleep() is not exactly the same as the previous code, but I only did
this replacement where I thought long delays were *desired*. If this is
not the case here, then just disregard this patch.
Thanks,
Nish
Applys-to: 2.6.7
Description: Uses msleep() instead of schedule_timeout() to guarantee
the task delays at least the desired time amount.
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
--- linux-vanilla/drivers/block/paride/pt.c 2004-06-16 05:19:02.000000000 +0000
+++ linux-dev/drivers/block/paride/pt.c 2004-07-08 23:20:47.000000000 +0000
@@ -401,12 +401,6 @@ static int pt_atapi(struct pt_unit *tape
return r;
}
-static void pt_sleep(int cs)
-{
- current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
- schedule_timeout(cs);
-}
-
static int pt_poll_dsc(struct pt_unit *tape, int pause, int tmo, char *msg)
{
struct pi_adapter *pi = tape->pi;
@@ -416,7 +410,7 @@ static int pt_poll_dsc(struct pt_unit *t
e = 0;
s = 0;
while (k < tmo) {
- pt_sleep(pause);
+ msleep(jiffies_to_msecs(pause));
k++;
pi_connect(pi);
write_reg(pi, 6, DRIVE(tape));
@@ -474,11 +468,11 @@ static int pt_reset(struct pt_unit *tape
write_reg(pi, 6, DRIVE(tape));
write_reg(pi, 7, 8);
- pt_sleep(20 * HZ / 1000);
+ msleep(20);
k = 0;
while ((k++ < PT_RESET_TMO) && (status_reg(pi) & STAT_BUSY))
- pt_sleep(HZ / 10);
+ msleep(100);
flg = 1;
for (i = 0; i < 5; i++)
@@ -512,7 +506,7 @@ static int pt_ready_wait(struct pt_unit
if (!(((p & 0xffff) == 0x0402) || ((p & 0xff) == 6)))
return p;
k++;
- pt_sleep(HZ);
+ msleep(1000);
}
return 0x000020; /* timeout */
}
[-- 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
prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-07-20 18:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-07-20 18:04 [Kernel-janitors] [PATCH] paride: replace schedule_timeout() with Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-07-20 18:06 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-07-20 18:08 ` Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-07-20 18:10 ` Nishanth Aravamudan [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040720181003.GD2320@us.ibm.com \
--to=nacc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.