From: Alan Stern <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 11:51:57 -0400 (EDT)
In my patch it was possible for the inner loop one to succeed, but the
outer one to not do so.
In your's this is not the case so I guess it's OK.
I wonder if it's so wise trying to do two things at once. Here we are
adding the loop timeouts, and also changing to using jiffies based
timeouts rather than a chip timer register based one.
I preferred my patches because it solved one single problem, the lack
of loop limits. The timeout mechanism could have been changed in
another followon patch.