On Sun, Sep 04, 2005 Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> On 9/4/05, Johannes Stezenbach <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > -static int numpkt = 0, lastj, numts, numstuff, numsec, numinvalid;
> > +static int numpkt = 0, numts, numstuff, numsec, numinvalid;
> > +static unsigned long lastj;
> >
> > static void ttusb_process_muxpack(struct ttusb *ttusb, const u8 * muxpack,
> > int len)
> > @@ -779,7 +781,7 @@ static void ttusb_iso_irq(struct urb *ur
> > u8 *data;
> > int len;
> > numpkt++;
> > - if ((jiffies - lastj) >= HZ) {
> > + if (time_after_eq(jiffies, lastj + HZ)) {
>
> I think you actually want:
>
> static void ttusb_iso_irq(....)
> {
> unsigned long lastj;
>
> ...
>
> lastj = jiffies + HZ;
> if (time_after_eq(jiffies, lastj)) {
> ...
>
> }
>
> The current code doesn't assign jiffies to lastj at any point that I see.
The code in question is used to print a one-per-second debug output,
and lastj is assigned after every print.
I agree that it's ugly, though.
Johannes
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |