All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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: Re: [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace
Date: Wed, 01 Sep 2004 22:58:42 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040901225841.GF7467@stro.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040901214815.GA13071@bougret.hpl.hp.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 737 bytes --]

On Wed, 01 Sep 2004, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 11:40:03PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > On Wed, 01 Sep 2004, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
..
> > 
> > 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.
> 
> 	I don't have complain about converting the (HZ + 99) / 100
> expressions to something saner. My beef is the fact that msleep hide
> the fact that a schedule might happen. This is important in the IrDA
> code.

sorry my woding was confusing:
(HZ + 99) / 100 is correct!
as msleep(10)
 
--
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: Re: [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep()
Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 00:58:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040901225841.GF7467@stro.at> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040901214815.GA13071@bougret.hpl.hp.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 737 bytes --]

On Wed, 01 Sep 2004, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 11:40:03PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > On Wed, 01 Sep 2004, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
..
> > 
> > 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.
> 
> 	I don't have complain about converting the (HZ + 99) / 100
> expressions to something saner. My beef is the fact that msleep hide
> the fact that a schedule might happen. This is important in the IrDA
> code.

sorry my woding was confusing:
(HZ + 99) / 100 is correct!
as msleep(10)
 
--
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

  parent reply	other threads:[~2004-09-01 22:58 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   ` [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace maximilian attems
2004-09-01 21:40     ` [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep() 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       ` maximilian attems [this message]
2004-09-01 22:58         ` 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=20040901225841.GF7467@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.