From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 206-248-137-77.dsl.teksavvy.com ([206.248.137.77] helo=mail.isoar.ca) by pentafluge.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1JrJLn-00080v-CZ for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 20:56:28 +0000 Received: from [10.0.200.99] (vpn02.rossvideo.com [209.5.118.98]) by mail.isoar.ca (8.14.1/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m3UKtJwL004152 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:55:21 -0400 Message-ID: <4818DCB6.3020004@isoar.ca> Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:55:18 -0400 From: "Andrew E. Mileski" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] nand_wait_ready() timeout scaling References: <1209583375-11136-1-git-send-email-andrewm@isoar.ca> <4818CC89.2010106@isoar.ca> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Trent Piepho wrote: > Andrew E. Mileski wrote: >> Just realized that 100 Hz systems would have a problem with this patch >> since (100 * 8) / 1000 = 0. Guess the simple solution is to make the >> timeout 10 ms. > > msecs_to_jiffies() is what you want to use. Thanks. Guess all similar calculations in nand_base.c file should be changed to that too. -- Andrew E. Mileski