Use msleep() instead of schedule_timeout() to guarantee the task
delays as expected. TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE is used in the current code, but signals
are not checked for, so I believe the change to msleep() is appropriate.

Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <nacc@us.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Domen Puncer <domen@coderock.org>
---


 kj-domen/fs/smbfs/proc.c |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff -puN fs/smbfs/proc.c~msleep-fs_smbfs_proc fs/smbfs/proc.c
--- kj/fs/smbfs/proc.c~msleep-fs_smbfs_proc	2005-03-02 10:43:15.000000000 +0100
+++ kj-domen/fs/smbfs/proc.c	2005-03-02 10:43:15.000000000 +0100
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@
 #include <linux/smb_fs.h>
 #include <linux/smbno.h>
 #include <linux/smb_mount.h>
+#include <linux/delay.h>
 
 #include <net/sock.h>
 
@@ -2397,8 +2398,7 @@ smb_proc_readdir_long(struct file *filp,
 		if (req->rq_rcls == ERRSRV && req->rq_err == ERRerror) {
 			/* a damn Win95 bug - sometimes it clags if you 
 			   ask it too fast */
-			current->state = TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE;
-			schedule_timeout(HZ/5);
+			msleep(200);
 			continue;
                 }
 
_