parport/ieee1284: replace
Subsystems (2)
PATCH 1/1 parport/ieee1284: replace
I would appreciate any comments from the janitors list. This is one (of many) cases where I made a decision about replacing
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);schedule_timeout(some_time);
with
msleep(jiffies_to_msecs(some_time));
msleep() is not exactly the same as the previous code, but I only did this replacement where I thought long delays were *desired*. If this is not the case here, then just disregard this patch.
Thanks,
Nish
Applys-to: 2.6.7
Description: Uses msleep() instead of schedule_timeout() to guarantee the task delays the desired time.
drivers/parport/ieee1284.c +2 -4
@@ -212,13 +212,11 @@ int parport_wait_peripheral(struct parpoif ((status & mask) == result)return 0 ; -if (!ret) { +if (!ret)/* parport_wait_event didn't time out, but the * peripheral wasn't actually ready either. * Wait for another 10ms. */ -__set_current_state (TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE ); -schedule_timeout ((HZ +99 ) /100 ); - } +msleep (10 ); }return 1 ;
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors
PATCH 1/1 parport/ieee1284_ops: replace
I would appreciate any comments from the janitors list. This is one (of many) cases where I made a decision about replacing
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);schedule_timeout(some_time);
with
msleep(jiffies_to_msecs(some_time));
msleep() is not exactly the same as the previous code, but I only did this replacement where I thought long delays were *desired*. If this is not the case here, then just disregard this patch.
Thanks,
Nish
Applys-to: 2.6.7
Description: Uses msleep() instead of schedule_timeout() to guarantee the task delays the desired time.
drivers/parport/ieee1284_ops.c +1 -2
@@ -542,8 +542,7 @@ size_t parport_ieee1284_ecp_read_data (s/* Yield the port for a while. */ if (count && dev->port->irq !=PARPORT_IRQ_NONE ) {parport_release (dev); -__set_current_state (TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE ); -schedule_timeout ((HZ +24 ) /25 ); +msleep (40 );parport_claim_or_block (dev); }else
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors
Re: [Kernel-janitors] [PATCH] parport/ieee1284:
In reply to Nishanth AravamudanI think TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE is needed here. The top of the loop the schedule_timeout is in looks for signals.
Quoted 52 lines · Nishanth Aravamudan
I would appreciate any comments from the janitors list. This is one (of many) cases where I made a decision about replacing
set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);schedule_timeout(some_time);with
msleep(jiffies_to_msecs(some_time));
msleep()is not exactly the same as the previous code, but I only did this replacement where I thought long delays were *desired*. If this is not the case here, then just disregard this patch.Thanks,
NishApplys-to: 2.6.7
Description: Uses
msleep()instead ofschedule_timeout()to guarantee the task delays the desired time.Signed-off-by Nishanth Aravamudan <[email protected]>drivers/parport/ieee1284.c +2
-5@@ -212,13 +212,11 @@ int parport_wait_peripheral(struct parpoif ((status & mask) == result)return 0 ; -if (!ret) { +if (!ret)/* parport_wait_event didn't time out, but the * peripheral wasn't actually ready either. * Wait for another 10ms. */ -__set_current_state (TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE ); -schedule_timeout ((HZ +99 ) /100 ); - } +msleep (10 ); }return 1 ; ------------------------------------------------------------------------_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors
Signature · 2 lines
-------------------------- Mark Hollomon
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors