On Sun, Sep 04, 2005 Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> On 9/4/05, Johannes Stezenbach <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 04, 2005 Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> > > On 9/4/05, Johannes Stezenbach <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > -#define UP_TIMEOUT (HZ/4)
> > > > +#define UP_TIMEOUT (HZ*7/25)
> > >
> > > #define UP_TIMEOUT msecs_to_jiffies(280)
> > > #define UP_TIMEOUT (7*msecs_to_jiffies(40)
> >
> > I agree it's nicer to read, but AFAIK not required for correctness?
> > If so, then we'll fix those up in linuxtv.org CVS and submit
> > cleanup patches later.
>
> Yeah, it's correct with the three current values of HZ (100, 250 and
> 1000), but if you try a not-so-clean value (like Con did with 864, or
> something), you might run into rounding issues. msecs_to_jiffies()
> should take care of them (or will be a single point to do so
> eventually).
Well, if msecs_to_jiffies() is the new way of specifying timeouts
we'd have a lot more to fix up in our tree. But something like
a remote control key-up timeout doesn't need much precision.
Generally I see nothing wrong with HZ/4, but something like
HZ*20/1000 could be problematic with small or odd HZ values.
Agreed? Or is it desired that people generally use msecs_to_jiffies()?
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]
| |
 |