Hi,
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 09:21:46PM +0200, Andreas Mohr wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 09:14:19PM +0200, Marcin Slusarz wrote:
Or better: frame_timeout * HZ
D'oh! ;-)
But then what about the other 3 bazillion places in the kernel
doing multiples of seconds?
linux-2.6.31]$
Andreas Mohr pisze:
Hi all,
./drivers/media/video/sn9c102/sn9c102_core.c
,
./drivers/media/video/et61x251/et61x251_core.c
and
./drivers/media/video/zc0301/zc0301_core.c
do
cam-module_param.frame_timeout *
1000 * msecs_to_jiffies(1)
Hi,
On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 09:14:19PM +0200, Marcin Slusarz wrote:
Andreas Mohr pisze:
./drivers/media/video/zc0301/zc0301_core.c
do
cam-module_param.frame_timeout *
1000 * msecs_to_jiffies(1) );
multiple times each.
What they
On 09/14/2009 11:07 PM, Andreas Mohr wrote:
./drivers/media/video/zc0301/zc0301_core.c
do
cam-module_param.frame_timeout *
1000 * msecs_to_jiffies(1) );
multiple times each.
What they should do instead is
frame_timeout *
Hi,
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 11:34:40PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
On 09/14/2009 11:07 PM, Andreas Mohr wrote:
./drivers/media/video/zc0301/zc0301_core.c
do
cam-module_param.frame_timeout *
1000 * msecs_to_jiffies(1) );
multiple
On Mon, 14 Sep 2009, Andreas Mohr wrote:
cam-module_param.frame_timeout *
1000 * msecs_to_jiffies(1) );
multiple times each.
What they should do instead is
frame_timeout * msecs_to_jiffies(1000), I'd think.
msecs_to_jiffies(1) is quite
On 09/14/2009 11:39 PM, Andreas Mohr wrote:
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 11:34:40PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
On 09/14/2009 11:07 PM, Andreas Mohr wrote:
msecs_to_jiffies(1) is quite a bit too boldly assuming
that all of the msecs_to_jiffies(x) implementation branches
always round up.
They do,
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 11:50:50PM +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
A potential problem here is rather that it may wait longer due to
returning 1 jiffie. It's then timeout * 1000 * 1. On 250HZ system it
makes a difference of multiple of 4. Don't think it's a real issue in
those drivers at all, but
