[PATCH 2.6] restore correct vaio handling in eeprom driver

Greg KH greg at kroah.com
Wed Jan 21 01:52:03 CET 2004


On Sat, Jan 17, 2004 at 08:31:53AM +0100, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > One comment: 
> > > -	if ((jiffies - data->last_updated > 300 * HZ) |
> > > -	    (jiffies < data->last_updated) || !data->valid) {
> > > -		dev_dbg(&client->dev, "Starting eeprom update\n");
> > > +	if (!(data->valid & (1 << slice)) ||
> > > +	    (jiffies - data->last_updated[slice] > 300 * HZ) ||
> > > +	    (jiffies < data->last_updated[slice])) {
> > 
> > We do these jiffies comparisons a lot, is everyone sure they are
> > correct?  We should probably be using the proper macros/functions for
> > this, right?  I think I looked at this a while ago, and think they
> > look correct, but it would be good if someone else can verify this.
> 
> Well, what the code is meant to do looks clear to me (do not refresh
> more often than every 300 seconds, do not get hosed by jiffies cycling).
> So I'd expect it to just work, and BTW it wouldn't be much of a problem
> if it did not (OK, it'll refresh more often, shouldn't harm too much).
> OTOH, if a macro exists that does this, and maybe handle more corner
> cases (not that I can think of any, but who knows), sure we should use
> it. Can you point us to it?

time_after()
time_before()
time_after_eq()
time_before_eq()

We should use these instead of our checks to make sure everything is
always correct.

thanks,

greg k-h



More information about the lm-sensors mailing list