HZ = 1000 isn't a 2.4 thing.
> As of current 2.4, there is the only user of ndelay() - ide_execute_command()
> that calls ndelay(400). Why udelay(1) cannot be used instead?
Why waste 500nS every IDE command as opposed to doing the job right ? The initial
ndelay() is a quick implementation. If you don't like it implement a better one,
if your box isnt fast implement it as udelay.
In the 2.5 tree I also hope we can avoid the ndelay in some cases
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to email@example.com
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/