[UPDATE PATCH] block/pg: replace pg_sleep() with msleep()

Nishanth Aravamudan
2005-01-11T02:46:06Z

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_pg.patch

Please consider replacing with the following patch:

Description: Use msleep()/ssleep() instead of pg_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. Change pg_sleep()
to use TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE as well.

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

--- 2.6.10-v/drivers/block/paride/pg.c 2004-12-24 13:35:25.000000000 -0800
+++ 2.6.10/drivers/block/paride/pg.c 2005-01-10 12:21:34.000000000 -0800
@@ -295,7 +295,7 @@ static inline u8 DRIVE(struct pg *dev)

static void pg_sleep(int cs)
{
- current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
+ set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE);
schedule_timeout(cs);
}

@@ -409,7 +409,7 @@ static int pg_reset(struct pg *dev)
write_reg(dev, 6, DRIVE(dev));
write_reg(dev, 7, 8);

- pg_sleep(20 * HZ / 1000);
+ msleep(20);

k = 0;
while ((k++ < PG_RESET_TMO) && (status_reg(dev) & STAT_BUSY))