On Sun, May 19, 2013 at 04:57:30PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote: > time_after (as opposed to time_after_equal) already ensures that the > cache lifetime is at least as much as requested. There is no point in > manually adding another jiffy to that value, and this can confuse the > reader into wrong interpretation. > > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Imre Deak <imre.deak@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Acked-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Are you going to take the series, or do you want me to handle it ? Thanks, Guenter _______________________________________________ lm-sensors mailing list lm-sensors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/lm-sensors
