Hi Lennert, On Sun, 22 Feb 2009 16:20:59 +0100, Lennert Buytenhek wrote: > On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 04:07:05PM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote: > > > From: Jean Delvare <[email protected]> > > Subject: i2c: Adapter timeout is in jiffies > > > > i2c_adapter.timeout is in jiffies. Fix all drivers which thought > > otherwise. It didn't really matter as long as the value was only used > > inside the driver, but soon i2c-core will use it too so it must have > > the proper unit. > > > > Note: for the i2c-mpc driver, this fixes a bug in polling mode. > > Timeout would trigger after 1 jiffy, which is most probably not what > > the author wanted. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <[email protected]> > > Cc: Clifford Wolf <[email protected]> > > Cc: Sean MacLennan <[email protected]> > > Cc: Stefan Roese <[email protected]> > > Cc: Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]> > > Cc: Dan Williams <[email protected]> > > Cc: Grant Likely <[email protected]> > > Cc: Mark A. Greer <[email protected]> > > Cc: Wolfram Sang <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-ibm_iic.c | 6 +++--- > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-iop3xx.c | 2 +- > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mpc.c | 4 ++-- > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c | 7 +++---- > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pca-isa.c | 2 +- > > 5 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > The i2c-mv64xxx part: > > Acked-by: Lennert Buytenhek <[email protected]>
Thanks. > Although I wonder if we shouldn't move away from expressing time > intervals in jiffies. Why? This is what time_after() and wait_event_interruptible_timeout() want, so this is the most efficient way (as discussed recently [1]). [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-i2c&m=123507862624484&w=2 -- Jean Delvare -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
