On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 01:16:49 +0200 (CEST) Roman Zippel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, > > On Tue, 7 Aug 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > I'd be surprised if there was significant overhead - the maximum frequency > > at which msleep() can be called is 1000Hz. We'd need an awful lot of > > overhead for that to cause problems, surely? > > > > <thinks he's missing something again> > > _Anybody_ has yet to answer what's wrong with adding a nanosleep() and > using that instead. > You mean that the implementation could be simplified if msleep() were to simply call do_nanosleep()? That would work, although a bit of refactoring would be needed so that we could implement the TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE msleep() that way. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/