From: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
To: jt@hpl.hp.com
Cc: kj <kernel-janitors@osdl.org>, netdev@oss.sgi.com, jgarzik@pobox.com
Subject: Re: [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep()
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 22:03:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040901220326.GB2516@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040901214815.GA13071@bougret.hpl.hp.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1508 bytes --]
On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 02:48:15PM -0700, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 11:40:03PM +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > On Wed, 01 Sep 2004, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, Sep 01, 2004 at 11:05:23PM +0200, janitor@sternwelten.at wrote:
> > > > I would appreciate any comments from the janitor@sternweltens list.
> > uups mangled some text there sorry for this silly email.
> > >
> > > I already commented that I don't like the confusing msleep()
> > > API and I prefer the more explicit schedule_timeout().
> > > But that's only me...
> > >
> > > Jean
> >
> > hmm we have still archs were HZ < 100.
> > i find msleep use msecs units a lot more readable than
> > schedule_timeout((HZ + 99) / 100);
> >
> > the schedule_timeout(HZ/100) gets safely converted with msleep.
>
> I don't have complain about converting the (HZ + 99) / 100
> expressions to something saner. My beef is the fact that msleep hide
> the fact that a schedule might happen. This is important in the IrDA
> code.
It *is* important for developers to realize that invoking msleep() may
involve giving up the CPU (ie. eventually calling schedule()); however,
I think my previous point, that the name itself (the "sleep" part, I mean)
is a fair and clear indication of this behavior, is valid. In those
cases where a busy-wait is desired, then mdelay() should be used, as
indicated by "delay". I think with this in mind & with a quick glance at
the source, if need be, the naming is quite safe.
-Nish
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 167 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-01 22:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-09-01 21:05 [patch 1/8] irda/act200l-sir: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep() janitor
2004-09-01 21:09 ` Jean Tourrilhes
2004-09-01 21:40 ` [Kernel-janitors] " maximilian attems
2004-09-01 21:48 ` Jean Tourrilhes
2004-09-01 22:03 ` Nishanth Aravamudan [this message]
2004-09-01 22:58 ` [Kernel-janitors] " maximilian attems
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040901220326.GB2516@us.ibm.com \
--to=nacc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=jt@hpl.hp.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@osdl.org \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).