From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Elias Oltmanns Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] libata: consistently use msecs for time durations Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 00:35:23 +0200 Message-ID: <873aodx6qc.fsf@denkblock.local> References: <12112174741373-git-send-email-htejun@gmail.com> <12112174751988-git-send-email-htejun@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from nebensachen.de ([195.34.83.29]:41573 "EHLO mail.nebensachen.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755466AbYESWfU (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2008 18:35:20 -0400 Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: jeff@garzik.org, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org, liml@rtr.ca Tejun Heo wrote: > libata has been using mix of jiffies and msecs for time druations. > This is getting confusing. As writing sub HZ values in jiffies is > PITA and msecs_to_jiffies() can't be used as initializer, unify unit > for all time durations to msecs. So, durations are in msecs and > deadlines are in jiffies. ata_deadline() is added to compute deadline > from a start time and duration in msecs. > > While at it, drop now superflous _msec suffix from arguments and > rename @timeout to @deadline if it represents a fixed point in time > rather than duration. > > Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo [...] > +static inline unsigned long ata_deadline(unsigned long from_jiffies, > + unsigned long timeout_msecs) ^^^^^^ Wouldn't that be against the newly adopted convention? Just a thought. Regards, Elias