Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 12 Apr 2006 10:32:36 -0700 | From | Nishanth Aravamudan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 7/7] tpm: Driver for next generation TPM chips |
| |
On 12.04.2006 [12:29:17 -0500], Kylene Jo Hall wrote: > On Tue, 2006-04-11 at 16:05 -0700, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote: > > return l; > > > + > > > + } else { > > > + /* wait for burstcount */ > > > + stop = jiffies + (HZ * chip->vendor.timeout_a / 1000); > > > + do { > > > + if (check_locality(chip, l) >= 0) > > > + return l; > > > + msleep(TPM_TIMEOUT); > > > + } > > > + while (time_before(jiffies, stop)); > > > + } > > > > This looks like it could take the msecs_to_jiffies() conversion as well. > > Might as well cache it before the if/else, as both clauses use it? > > Really, it is just wait_event*() without the wait-queue. Well, this is > > at least one more consumer potentially of the poll_event*() API I had > > written a while back, I'll dust it off again if I have the time. > > > > <snip> > > > > > +static int get_burstcount(struct tpm_chip *chip) > > > +{ > > > + unsigned long stop; > > > + int burstcnt; > > > + > > > + /* wait for burstcount */ > > > + /* which timeout value, spec has 2 answers (c & d) */ > > > + stop = jiffies + (HZ * chip->vendor.timeout_d / 1000); > > > > msecs_to_jiffies(). > > > > > Since the timeout and duration values are always used in jiffies I > think I'll just convert them to those values when I store them in the > chip struct to cut way down on the number of conversions all together. > Sound reasonable?
Probably, as long as they aren't exposed to userspace in any way. I don't think userspace should do any calculations in jiffies units.
Thanks, Nish
-- Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com> IBM Linux Technology Center - 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/
| |