wan: time_before()

To be future-proof and for better readability the time comparisons are
modified to use time_before() instead of plain, error-prone math.

Signed-off-by: Manuel Schölling <manuel.schoelling@gmx.de>
---
 drivers/net/wan/farsync.c |    4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

On Sun, 2014-05-25 at 19:32 +0200, Manuel Schölling wrote:
> To be future-proof and for better readability the time comparisons are
> modified to use time_before() instead of plain, error-prone math.

Sensible change, but it seems these should be
udelay(some_constant) instead of a a rather
variable time wait based on a system/config
defined jiffies.

Kevin?

> diff --git a/drivers/net/wan/farsync.c b/drivers/net/wan/farsync.c
[]
> @@ -697,14 +697,14 @@ fst_cpureset(struct fst_card_info *card)
>  		 * We are delaying here to allow the 9054 to reset itself
>  		 */
>  		j = jiffies + 1;
> -		while (jiffies < j)
> +		while (time_before(jiffies, j))
>  			/* Do nothing */ ;
>  		outw(0x240f, card->pci_conf + CNTRL_9054 + 2);
>  		/*
>  		 * We are delaying here to allow the 9054 to reload its eeprom
>  		 */
>  		j = jiffies + 1;
> -		while (jiffies < j)
> +		while (time_before(jiffies, j))
>  			/* Do nothing */ ;
>  		outw(0x040f, card->pci_conf + CNTRL_9054 + 2);
>  



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 10:58:52 -0700

> On Sun, 2014-05-25 at 19:32 +0200, Manuel Schölling wrote:
>> To be future-proof and for better readability the time comparisons are
>> modified to use time_before() instead of plain, error-prone math.
> 
> Sensible change, but it seems these should be
> udelay(some_constant) instead of a a rather
> variable time wait based on a system/config
> defined jiffies.

Agreed, this code probably wants udelay(10) or something like
that.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Hi,
    Yes, a usleep(10) would be just fine.


Regards

Kevin

-----Original Message-----
From: David Miller [mailto:davem@davemloft.net] 
Sent: 26 May 2014 05:41
To: joe@perches.com
Cc: manuel.schoelling@gmx.de; Kevin Curtis; netdev@vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wan: time_before()

From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 10:58:52 -0700

> On Sun, 2014-05-25 at 19:32 +0200, Manuel Schölling wrote:
>> To be future-proof and for better readability the time comparisons 
>> are modified to use time_before() instead of plain, error-prone math.
> 
> Sensible change, but it seems these should be
> udelay(some_constant) instead of a a rather variable time wait based 
> on a system/config defined jiffies.

Agreed, this code probably wants udelay(10) or something like that.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html