[UPDATE PATCH] block/pcd: replace pcd_sleep() with msleep()/ssleep()

Nishanth Aravamudan
2005-01-10T21:50:52Z

Sorry, slightly inaccurate description...

On Mon, Jan 10, 2005 at 05:47:03PM +0100, Domen Puncer wrote:
> Patchset of 171 patches is at http://coderock.org/kj/2.6.10-bk13-kj/
>
> Quick patch summary: about 30 new, 30 merged, 30 dropped.
> Seems like most external trees are merged in -linus, so i'll start
> (re)sending old patches.

<snip>

> msleep_interruptible-drivers_block_pcd.patch

Please consider replacing with the following patch:

Description: Use msleep()/ssleep() instead of pcd_sleep() to guarantee
the task delays as expected. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE is used in the original code,
however there is no check on the return values / for signals, thus I believe
TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE (and hence msleep()) is more appropriate. Remove definition
of pcd_sleep().

Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>

--- 2.6.10-v/drivers/block/paride/pcd.c 2004-12-24 13:35:39.000000000 -0800
+++ 2.6.10/drivers/block/paride/pcd.c 2005-01-10 12:20:29.000000000 -0800
@@ -534,12 +534,6 @@ static int pcd_tray_move(struct cdrom_de
position ? "eject" : "close tray");
}

-static void pcd_sleep(int cs)
-{
- current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
- schedule_timeout(cs);
-}
-
static int pcd_reset(struct pcd_unit *cd)
{
int i, k, flg;
@@ -549,11 +543,11 @@ static int pcd_reset(struct pcd_unit *cd
write_reg(cd, 6, 0xa0 + 0x10 * cd->drive);
write_reg(cd, 7, 8);

- pcd_sleep(20 * HZ / 1000); /* delay a bit */
+ msleep(20); /* delay a bit */

k = 0;
while ((k++ < PCD_RESET_TMO) && (status_reg(cd) & IDE_BUSY))
- pcd_sleep(HZ / 10);
+ msleep(100);

flg = 1;
for (i = 0; i < 5; i++)
@@ -592,7 +586,7 @@ static int pcd_ready_wait(struct pcd_uni
if (!(((p & 0xffff) == 0x0402) || ((p & 0xff) == 6)))
return p;
k++;
- pcd_sleep(HZ);
+ ssleep(1);
}
return 0x000020; /* timeout */
}