From: Fabio Olive Leite <fleite@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Attribute timeout handling and wrapping u32
	jiffies
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2007 11:54:01 -0300
Message-ID: <20070725145401.GB24321@sleipnir.redhat.com>
References: <20070725030809.GB27619@sleipnir.redhat.com>
	<1185372013.6585.73.camel@localhost>
	<20070725142824.GA24321@sleipnir.redhat.com>
	<1185373979.6585.81.camel@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
To: linux-nfs <nfs@lists.sourceforge.net>
In-Reply-To: <1185373979.6585.81.camel@localhost>
Sender: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net
Errors-To: nfs-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net

On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 10:32:59AM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> > =

> > I think that in the second check you mean this:
> > =

> > #define time_in_range(a,b,c) \
> > 	(time_after_eq(a,b) && \
> > 	 time_before_eq(a,b+c))
> =

> No. IMO [b;c] should be the range for the generic function, and it
> should be up to the NFS code to do the 'stored jiffies + constant
> timeout' calculation.

OK. That makes sense, since we then only care about jiffy values and
can assume typing.

> You will note that time_in_range() does in any
> case return true if you are inside the valid time range, so you will
> usually want to do
> =

> if (!time_in_range())...
> =

> in order to do the timeout_or_wrap() test.

Indeed, and the code also looks more readable.

Let's see how it behaves.

Regards,
F=E1bio
-- =

ex sed lex awk yacc, e pluribus unix, amem

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist  -  NFS@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs