Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 23 Sep 2005 11:04:05 -0700 (PDT) | From | Davide Libenzi <> | Subject | Re: [patch] Make epoll_wait() handle negative timeouts as MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT ... |
| |
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, Nish Aravamudan wrote:
> On 9/23/05, Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> wrote: >> >> As reported by Vadim Lobanov, epoll_wait() did not handle correctly >> timeouts <0 (only the -1 case was MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT'd). >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org> > > Arrgggh, this is as wrong as sys_poll() was before! :) > > --- a/fs/eventpoll.c 2005-09-23 10:06:45.000000000 -0700 > +++ b/fs/eventpoll.c 2005-09-23 10:09:35.000000000 -0700 > @@ -1507,7 +1507,7 @@ > * and the overflow condition. The passed timeout is in milliseconds, > * that why (t * HZ) / 1000. > */ > - jtimeout = timeout == -1 || timeout > (MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT - 1000) / HZ ? > + jtimeout = timeout < 0 || timeout > (MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT - 1000) / HZ ? > > @timeout is in miliseconds, per the comment, yes? If so, then > > timeout [msecs] > MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT [jiffies] - 1000 [jiffies] / HZ > [jiffies / sec]
Sh*t, you're right! Reposting soon.
- Davide
- 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/
| |