From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: Sridhar Samudrala <sri@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Edgar Toernig <froese@gmx.de>,
davem@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Consolidate multiple implementations of jiffies-msecs conversions.
Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2004 14:03:01 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <40647E65.7020903@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0403261007370.6718@localhost.localdomain>
Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, Edgar Toernig wrote:
>
>
>>Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
>>
>>>The following patch to 2.6.5-rc2 consolidates 6 different implementations
>>>of msecs to jiffies and 3 different implementation of jiffies to msecs.
>>>All of them now use the generic msecs_to_jiffies() and jiffies_to_msecs()
>>>that are added to include/linux/time.h
>>>[...]
>>>-#define MSECS(ms) (((ms)*HZ/1000)+1)
>>>-return (((ms)*HZ+999)/1000);
>>>+return (msecs / 1000) * HZ + (msecs % 1000) * HZ / 1000;
>>
>>Did you check that all users of the new version will work correctly
>>with your rounding? Explicit round-up of delays is often required,
>>especially when talking to hardware...
>
>
> I don't see any issues with the 2.6 default HZ value of 1000 as they become
> no-ops and there is no need for any rounding.
> I guess you are referring to cases when HZ < 1000(ex: 100) and msecs is
> less than 10. In those cases, the new version returns 0, whereas some of the
> older versions return 1.
We'll definitely want to return 1 rather than zero, for the uses in my
drivers, at least...
Jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-03-26 19:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-03-25 20:17 [PATCH] Consolidate multiple implementations of jiffies-msecs conversions Sridhar Samudrala
2004-03-25 20:32 ` David S. Miller
2004-03-25 20:36 ` Jeff Garzik
2004-03-25 21:05 ` Bill Rugolsky Jr.
2004-03-25 23:49 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2004-03-26 0:44 ` Edgar Toernig
2004-03-26 18:49 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2004-03-26 19:03 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2004-03-29 19:57 ` Sridhar Samudrala
2004-03-26 20:45 ` Edgar Toernig
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=40647E65.7020903@pobox.com \
--to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=froese@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=sri@us.ibm.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.