Re: [-mm PATCH 29/32] drivers/scsi: fix-up schedule_timeout() usage

[Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>]

On 15.08.2005 [20:34:27 +0000], Willem Riede wrote:
> On 08/15/2005 02:27:51 PM, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > Description: Use schedule_timeout_uninterruptible() instead of
> > set_current_state()/schedule_timeout() to reduce kernel size.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
> > 
> > ---
> > 
> >  drivers/scsi/osst.c           |    9 +++------
> >
> > diff -urpN 2.6.13-rc5-mm1/drivers/scsi/osst.c
> > 2.6.13-rc5-mm1-dev/drivers/scsi/osst.c
> > --- 2.6.13-rc5-mm1/drivers/scsi/osst.c	2005-08-07 10:05:21.000000000
> > -0700
> > +++ 2.6.13-rc5-mm1-dev/drivers/scsi/osst.c	2005-08-12
> > 13:42:13.000000000 -0700
> > @@ -862,8 +862,7 @@ static int osst_recover_wait_frame(struc
> >  				retval = osst_write_error_recovery(STp,
> > aSRpnt, 0);
> >  				break;
> >  			}
> > -			set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> > -			schedule_timeout (HZ / OSST_POLL_PER_SEC);
> > +			schedule_timeout_interruptible(HZ /
> OSST_POLL_PER_SEC);
> 
> Others have suggested using msleep in osst instead of schedule, which I think
> is 
> more appropriate.

That's my fault, you are right, a patch for msleep() usage in OSST
already exists in the latest -KJ patchset and covers all these changes.
I tried to avoid collisions between existing changes in -KJ and these
new ones in -MM, but must have missed this one.

Thanks,
Nish