lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: time_after - what on earth???
On 09/12/2007 12:15 AM, Adrian McMenamin wrote:

> On 11/09/2007, Rene Herman <rene.herman@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 09/12/2007 12:05 AM, Adrian McMenamin wrote:
>>
>>> OK, why does this line occasionally return true:
>>>
>>> if ((maple_dev->interval > 0) && (jiffies >maple_dev->when))
>>>
>>> while this one never does (no other changes made):
>>>
>>> if ((maple_dev->interval > 0) && (time_after(jiffies, maple_dev->when)))
>> Is maple_dev->when an unsigned long?
>>
> Yes. Does that make a difference?

If it had been a signed type, it could've wrapped to something you didn't
expect, explaining the difference at least...

With an unsigned long, the only diference should be that time_after() deals
with jiffie wrapping which I assume is not an actual problem here. I'll
retreat into the shades again... ;-(

Rene.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-09-12 00:21    [W:0.034 / U:1.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site