From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.11-rc2 11/29] ide: add ide_drive_t.sleeping Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 01:47:28 +0100 Message-ID: <58cb370e05020216476a8f403c@mail.gmail.com> References: <20050202024017.GA621@htj.dyndns.org> <20050202025448.GL621@htj.dyndns.org> Reply-To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.196]:55428 "EHLO wproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262862AbVBCAra (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Feb 2005 19:47:30 -0500 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 67so169196wri for ; Wed, 02 Feb 2005 16:47:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20050202025448.GL621@htj.dyndns.org> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 11:54:48 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > > 11_ide_drive_sleeping_fix.patch > > > > ide_drive_t.sleeping field added. 0 in sleep field used to > > indicate inactive sleeping but because 0 is a valid jiffy > > value, though slim, there's a chance that something can go > > weird. And while at it, explicit jiffy comparisons are > > converted to use time_{after|before} macros. Same question as for "add ide_hwgroup_t.polling" patch. AFAICS drive->sleep is either '0' or 'timeout + jiffies' (always > 0)