On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:20:10 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 09:13:19PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 01:57:51 +0800, Eric Miao wrote:
> > > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 10:08 PM, Wolfram Sang <w.sang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > The timeout value is in jiffies, so it should be using HZ, not a plain
> > > > number. Assume '100' means 100ms here and adapt accordingly.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Russell King <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Paul Shen <paul.shen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Cc: Mike Rapoport <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > Janitorial fix, not tested due to no hardware.
> > > >
> > > > arch/arm/mach-pxa/viper.c | 5 +++--
> > > > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/viper.c b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/viper.c
> > > > index 1dd1334..c25921f 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-pxa/viper.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-pxa/viper.c
> > > > @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
> > > > #include <linux/pm.h>
> > > > #include <linux/sched.h>
> > > > #include <linux/gpio.h>
> > > > +#include <linux/jiffies.h>
> > > > #include <linux/i2c-gpio.h>
> > > > #include <linux/serial_8250.h>
> > > > #include <linux/smc91x.h>
> > > > @@ -453,7 +454,7 @@ static struct i2c_gpio_platform_data i2c_bus_data = {
> > > > .sda_pin = VIPER_RTC_I2C_SDA_GPIO,
> > > > .scl_pin = VIPER_RTC_I2C_SCL_GPIO,
> > > > .udelay = 10,
> > > > - .timeout = 100,
> > > > + .timeout = HZ / 10,
> > > > };
> > > >
> > > > static struct platform_device i2c_bus_device = {
> > > > @@ -778,7 +779,7 @@ static void __init viper_tpm_init(void)
> > > > .sda_pin = VIPER_TPM_I2C_SDA_GPIO,
> > > > .scl_pin = VIPER_TPM_I2C_SCL_GPIO,
> > > > .udelay = 10,
> > > > - .timeout = 100,
> > > > + .timeout = HZ / 10,
> > > > };
> > > > char *errstr;
> > > >
> > >
> > > One other better and cleaner approach to such inconsistency issue is
> > > to have a timeout_ms field, and having i2c-gpio.c driver to convert this
> > > to jiffies using msec_to_jiffies() at run-time.
> >
> > With what benefit? Expressing time values in units of HZ is very
> > frequent in the kernel code and shouldn't actually surprise anyone.
>
> Actually, this patch shows there is confusion.
>
> "Assume '100' means 100ms here and adapt accordingly."
>
> Since this patch is for ARM, where HZ=100, the above patch is not a
> simple "convert how we derive this constant" patch - it's a functional
> change, reducing the timeouts by a factor of 10.
>
> Could that be because the patch author misinterpreted the HZ-based
> values?
I admit I would have assumed 100 -> HZ, as hard-coded HZ-dependent
value typically assume HZ=100.
> I suspect I'm not the only one who thinks that the latter of "HZ / 10"
> "100ms" is easier to read and comprehend without mistake.
OTOH, converting from ms to jiffies each time you need the value has a
cost.
--
Jean Delvare
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
