ncpfs seems to need the timer init
A message that is not in the archive (sent off-list or not yet received): [email protected]
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 02:12:52AM +0000, Linux Kernel Mailing List wrote:
Linus, please revert this. It is changeset
[email protected]|ChangeSet|20021126021252|43411
Timer is already initialized few lines above in the code. If you'll look through fs/ncpfs/inode.c history, you'll find that I already asked once for removing this redundant timer initialization, but unfortunately it found its way to the tree again :-(
I prefer having init_timer() and timeout_tm setup separate, as now I can safely call del_timer in shutdown without having to test whether I'm in UDP or TCP code...
Thanks,
Petr Vandrovec [email protected]
Quoted 25 lines
ChangeSet 1.842.42.99, 2002/11/25 18:12:52-08:00, [email protected]
[PATCH] ncpfs seems to need the timer init
# This patch includes the following deltas:
# ChangeSet 1.842.42.98 -> 1.842.42.99
#fs/ncpfs/inode.c1.36 -> 1.37
#inode.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertion(+)diff -Nru
a/fs/ncpfs/inode.cb/fs/ncpfs/inode.cfs/ncpfs/inode.c +1
-0@@ -575,6 +575,7 @@ }else {INIT_WORK (&server->rcv.tq, ncpdgram_rcv_proc, server);INIT_WORK (&server->timeout_tq, ncpdgram_timeout_proc, server); +init_timer (&server->timeout_tm); server->timeout_tm.data = (unsigned long )server; server->timeout_tm.function = ncpdgram_timeout_call; }
Quoted 10 lines · Petr Vandrovec
On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 02:12:52AM +0000, Linux Kernel Mailing List wrote:
Linus, please revert this. It is changeset
[email protected]|ChangeSet|20021126021252|43411
Timer is already initialized few lines above in the code. If you'll look through
fs/ncpfs/inode.chistory, you'll find that I already asked once for removing this redundant timer initialization, but unfortunately it found its way to the tree again :-(
Sorry. I'll revert that in my tree too