From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261249AbUK2OJi (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Nov 2004 09:09:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261402AbUK2OJi (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Nov 2004 09:09:38 -0500 Received: from coderock.org ([193.77.147.115]:30654 "EHLO trashy.coderock.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261249AbUK2OJg (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Nov 2004 09:09:36 -0500 Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:09:30 +0100 From: Domen Puncer To: Jesper Juhl Cc: janitor@sternwelten.at, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@digeo.com Subject: Re: ds1620: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep() Message-ID: <20041129140929.GC7889@nd47.coderock.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 28/11/04 18:39 +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > +++ linux-2.6.9-rc1-bk7-max/drivers/char/ds1620.c 2004-09-01 19:34:43.000000000 +0200 > > @@ -373,8 +373,7 @@ static int __init ds1620_init(void) > > th_start.hi = 1; > > ds1620_write_state(&th_start); > > > > - set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); > > - schedule_timeout(2*HZ); > > + msleep(2000); > > > > ds1620_write_state(&th); > > > I'm wondering if 2000 is really the value we want here. As far as I can > see, the schedule_timeout(2*HZ); line has been there as long back as > since HZ was 100, so back then the delay would have been 200. if 200 is > all it needs, then we are now sleeping 10 times as long as really needed. > What is the argument behind the value used? It's right: schedule_timeout(2*HZ) sleeps for 2 seconds; msleep(2000) sleeps for 2000 miliseconds, and does not depend on what HZ is. Domen