Re: 2.5.13 IDE and preemptible kernel problems

[Linus Torvalds]

On Sun, 5 May 2002, Martin Dalecki wrote:
>
> OK, lest's make a deal you do the following and - realize
> immediately that there is a need for single argument
> time_past() or whatever and I turn spinlock debugging on :-).

Hmm.. Something like

	#define timeout_expired(x)	time_after(jiffies, (x))

migth indeed make sense.

But I'm a lazy bastard. Is there some victim^H^H^H^H^H^Hhero who would
want to do the 'sed s/time_after(jiffies,/timeout_expired(/g' and verify
that it does the right thing and send it to me as a patch?

The thing is, I wonder if it should be "time_after(jiffies,x)" or
"time_after_eq(jiffies,x)". There's a single-tick difference there..

		Linus