Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 17 Feb 2002 20:28:27 +0100 (CET) | From | Tim Schmielau <> | Subject | Re: [patch][looking for maintainers] jiffies compare fixups |
| |
On Mon, 11 Feb 2002, Horst von Brand wrote:
> Tim Schmielau <tim@physik3.uni-rostock.de> said: > > At the end of December, I made a patch to fix comparisons of the jiffies > > counter that would break at jiffies wraparound. > > I think you should just forward the remaining bits to Marcelo directly. >
Yes, I think I'll do so for 2.4.19pre.
[...] > > - if (led_active && jiffies > led_next_time) { > > + if (led_active && jiffies > time_after(jiffies, led_next_time)) { [...] > This hunk is surely wrong.
Thank you for spotting this. Obviously there are times at night when it is even too late for simple search&replace like changes.
Also thanks for your comments on the busy-waiting loops. I stumbled across them, too, but decided to first do the uncontroversial time_before/ time_after fix. I think I'll do another run on this low-latency (well, less-horrendous latency:-) stuff later.
Tim
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |