Re: ide_timer_expiry() - shouldn't 'wait' be int?

[Sergei Shtylyov <sshtylyov@ru.mvista.com>]

Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:

>>>>vi drivers/ide/ide-io.c +906 and note:

>>>>void ide_timer_expiry (unsigned long data)
>>>>{
>>>>	ide_expiry_t *expiry = hwif->expiry;
>>>>	...
>>>>	unsigned long   wait = -1;
>>>>		...
>>>>		if (expiry) {
>>>>			...
>>>>			wait = expiry(drive);
>>>>			if (wait > 0) { /* continue */

>>>>also note that in include/linux/ide.h:883:

>>>>typedef int (ide_expiry_t)(ide_drive_t *);

>>>>doesn't this mean that expiry returns int, and wait therefore should
>>>>be int as well?

>>>It does... and it seems like it could cause insanely long timeouts for:

>>>* ATA_DMA_ERR error in dma_timer_expiry()

>>>* commands without ->expiry in tc86c001_timer_expiry()
>>>  (TC86C001 IDE controller only)

>>>This is 2.6.29 material, care to make a patch?

>>    Er, it's not that bad as it gets cast back to *int* when calling 
>>ide_dma_timer_expiry().

> This case yes, however look at "wait > 0" one:

> On -1 returned from ->expiry code sets "rather" long timeouts
> (4294967295/HZ on 32-bit...).

    Ah... ignore me then. :-<

MBR, Sergei