Thread
Commits
-
Document units of "timeout" in ConditionVariableTimedSleep()
- f160bf06f72a 17.0 landed
-
Add comment to specify timeout unit in ConditionVariableTimedSleep()
shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com> — 2024-03-05T04:09:11Z
Hi hackers, ConditionVariableTimedSleep() accepts a timeout parameter, but it doesn't explicitly state the unit for the timeout anywhere. To determine this, one needs to look into the details of the function to find it out from the comments of the internally called function WaitLatch(). It would be beneficial to include a comment in the header of ConditionVariableTimedSleep() specifying that the timeout is in milliseconds, similar to what we have for other non-static functions like WaitLatch and WaitEventSetWait. Attached the patch for the same. thanks Shveta
-
Re: Add comment to specify timeout unit in ConditionVariableTimedSleep()
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2024-03-05T06:20:48Z
On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 09:39:11AM +0530, shveta malik wrote: > ConditionVariableTimedSleep() accepts a timeout parameter, but it > doesn't explicitly state the unit for the timeout anywhere. To > determine this, one needs to look into the details of the function to > find it out from the comments of the internally called function > WaitLatch(). It would be beneficial to include a comment in the header > of ConditionVariableTimedSleep() specifying that the timeout is in > milliseconds, similar to what we have for other non-static functions > like WaitLatch and WaitEventSetWait. Attached the patch for the same. That sounds like a good idea to me, so I'm OK with your suggestion. -- Michael
-
Re: Add comment to specify timeout unit in ConditionVariableTimedSleep()
Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> — 2024-03-09T06:48:59Z
On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 03:20:48PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > That sounds like a good idea to me, so I'm OK with your suggestion. Applied this one as f160bf06f72a. Thanks. -- Michael
-
Re: Add comment to specify timeout unit in ConditionVariableTimedSleep()
shveta malik <shveta.malik@gmail.com> — 2024-03-11T10:48:35Z
On Sat, Mar 9, 2024 at 12:19 PM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 05, 2024 at 03:20:48PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote: > > That sounds like a good idea to me, so I'm OK with your suggestion. > > Applied this one as f160bf06f72a. Thanks. Thanks! thanks Shveta