Any comments would be appreciated.
Description: Use msleep() instead of schedule_timeout()
to guarantee the task delays as expected.
Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Maximilian Attems <[email protected]>
---
linux-2.6.10-rc2-bk4-max/drivers/mtd/chips/amd_flash.c | 2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff -puN drivers/mtd/chips/amd_flash.c~msleep-drivers_mtd_chips_amd_flash drivers/mtd/chips/amd_flash.c
--- linux-2.6.10-rc2-bk4/drivers/mtd/chips/amd_flash.c~msleep-drivers_mtd_chips_amd_flash 2004-11-19 17:15:31.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.10-rc2-bk4-max/drivers/mtd/chips/amd_flash.c 2004-11-19 17:15:31.000000000 +0100
@@ -1122,7 +1122,7 @@ retry:
timeo = jiffies + (HZ * 20);
spin_unlock_bh(chip->mutex);
- schedule_timeout(HZ);
+ msleep(1000);
spin_lock_bh(chip->mutex);
while (flash_is_busy(map, adr, private->interleave)) {
_
On Sat, 2004-11-20 at 03:34 +0100, [email protected] wrote:
>
>
> Any comments would be appreciated.
>
> Description: Use msleep() instead of schedule_timeout()
> to guarantee the task delays as expected.
Applied; thanks. Likewise the ones for cfi_cmdset_0002.c and
cfi_cmdset_0020.c. The one for cfi_cmdset_0001.c doesn't apply any more
-- that just uses the cfi_udelay() helper function. So I fixed that too.
All in bk://linux-mtd.bkbits.net/mtd-2.6 and hence should be -mm$NEXT.
--
dwmw2