| To: | Margit Schubert-While <margitsw@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [patch 8/8] prism54/islpci_dev: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep() |
| From: | maximilian attems <janitor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 2 Sep 2004 12:03:22 +0200 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, kj <kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <200409021135.57632.margitsw@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Mail-followup-to: | Margit Schubert-While <margitsw@xxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, kj <kernel-janitors@xxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <200409021135.57632.margitsw@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.6+20040722i |
On Thu, 02 Sep 2004, Margit Schubert-While wrote: > On Thu, 02 Sep 2004, Maximilian scribeth: > > it shouldn't hinder 2.6 in it's progression. > I consider this a regression. > As schedule_timeout is used elesewhere in the prism54 code, > we are using a consistent and documented method. you didn't answer to the unit argument in favour of msleep. shure msleep is also consistent and documented. -- maks kernel janitor http://janitor.kernelnewbies.org/ |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [patch 8/8] prism54/islpci_dev: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep(), Margit Schubert-While |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [patch 8/8] prism54/islpci_dev: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep(), Margit Schubert-While |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [patch 8/8] prism54/islpci_dev: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep(), Margit Schubert-While |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Kernel-janitors] Re: [patch 8/8] prism54/islpci_dev: replace schedule_timeout() with msleep(), Nishanth Aravamudan |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |