On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 08:20:46AM +0800, Eric Miao wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Wolfram Sang <[email protected]> wrote:
> > The timeout value is in jiffies, so it should be using HZ, not a plain
> > number. Assume with HZ=100 '100' means 1s here and adapt accordingly.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Eric Miao <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Russell King <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Paul Shen <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Mike Rapoport <[email protected]>
> > Cc: Jean Delvare <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes since V1:
> >
> > * Don't assume 100 means 100ms
> >
> > Thanks for the comments!
> >
> > Admitted, the first try was a really bad guess. Maybe I got distracted from 
> > the
> > previous patch for another arch where the value was 10000.
> >
> > While this may still not be the favoured solution for Eric, I think it is at
> > least better than before, so it might be worth applying after all?
> 
> Ack. The clearest fix would involve more code to be updated, which
> can be postponed. This fix, at least, makes the time quantity clearer.

Thanks. Can you pick it up? Because it is a change to a board-file.

Regards,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to