From: maximilian attems <janitor@sternwelten.at>
To: jt@hpl.hp.com
Cc: kj <kernel-janitors@osdl.org>, netdev@oss.sgi.com, jgarzik@pobox.com
Subject: [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 21:40:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040901214003.GC7467@stro.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040901210929.GA11442@bougret.hpl.hp.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 666 bytes --]
On Wed, 01 Sep 2004, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 11:05:23PM +0200, janitor@sternwelten.at wrote:
> > I would appreciate any comments from the janitor@sternweltens list.
uups mangled some text there sorry for this silly email.
>
> I already commented that I don't like the confusing msleep()
> API and I prefer the more explicit schedule_timeout().
> But that's only me...
>
> Jean
hmm we have still archs were HZ < 100.
i find msleep use msecs units a lot more readable than
schedule_timeout((HZ + 99) / 100);
the schedule_timeout(HZ/100) gets safely converted with msleep.
--
maks
kernel janitor http://janitor.kernelnewbies.org/
[-- 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
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: maximilian attems <janitor@sternwelten.at>
To: jt@hpl.hp.com
Cc: kj <kernel-janitors@osdl.org>, netdev@oss.sgi.com, jgarzik@pobox.com
Subject: [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep()
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 23:40:03 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040901214003.GC7467@stro.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040901210929.GA11442@bougret.hpl.hp.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 666 bytes --]
On Wed, 01 Sep 2004, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 11:05:23PM +0200, janitor@sternwelten.at wrote:
> > I would appreciate any comments from the janitor@sternweltens list.
uups mangled some text there sorry for this silly email.
>
> I already commented that I don't like the confusing msleep()
> API and I prefer the more explicit schedule_timeout().
> But that's only me...
>
> Jean
hmm we have still archs were HZ < 100.
i find msleep use msecs units a lot more readable than
schedule_timeout((HZ + 99) / 100);
the schedule_timeout(HZ/100) gets safely converted with msleep.
--
maks
kernel janitor http://janitor.kernelnewbies.org/
[-- 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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-01 21:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-01 21:05 [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep() janitor
2004-09-01 21:09 ` Jean Tourrilhes
2004-09-01 21:40 ` maximilian attems [this message]
2004-09-01 21:40 ` [Kernel-janitors] " maximilian attems
2004-09-01 21:48 ` [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace Jean Tourrilhes
2004-09-01 21:48 ` [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep() Jean Tourrilhes
2004-09-01 22:03 ` [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-09-01 22:03 ` [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep() Nishanth Aravamudan
2004-09-01 22:58 ` [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace maximilian attems
2004-09-01 22:58 ` [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep() maximilian attems
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=20040901214003.GC7467@stro.at \
--to=janitor@sternwelten.at \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=jt@hpl.hp.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@osdl.org \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/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.