On 8/8/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 03:09:14PM +0400, Manu Abraham wrote: > > On 08 Aug 2007 13:55:28 +0200, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Andrew Morton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > > > > 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? > > > > > > The bigger risk is probably to break drivers that rely on msleep(1) > > > really being msleep( very long depending on HZ ) > > > > > > But the only way to find out is to try it. > > > > Well, i am quite sure a lot of drivers will be broken. But well .. if > > If you know of specific examples you should list them so that > they can be fixed proactively.
A bit hard to state, which all since quite some are RE'd. Well you can hear the cries when it is broken. :) Manu - 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/