Mladen Nikitovic wrote:
For very short waits i could use busy-wait, but for longer waits I
would like to have something that is non-blocking.
OK. Depending on where you do your busy-wait, of course, it may be
pre-emptable and so not blocking to the CPU. I agree that long waits may
as well yi
I'm writing a kernel module.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-code mailing list
opensolaris-code@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code
For very short waits i could use busy-wait, but for longer waits I would like
to have something that is non-blocking.
Regards,
Mladen
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-code mailing list
opensolaris-code@opensolaris.org
http:/
Mladen Nikitovic wrote:
Then I discovered that there are cyclics that can be created using
timer_create function. According to the online manual, using argument
CLOCK_HIGHRES should give me the desired resolution.
Actually, re-reading this I'm a little confused... are you running in
kernel or
Mladen Nikitovic wrote:
I want to introduce a delay in my code. The delay can be in
nanoseconds up to milliseconds. My current apporach using _timeout_
function with a callback has a lowest resolution of 10ms, which is
too coarse for my purpose.
For very short waits then you may want to busy-
Hi,
I want to introduce a delay in my code. The delay can be in nanoseconds up to
milliseconds. My current apporach using _timeout_ function with a callback has
a lowest resolution of 10ms, which is too coarse for my purpose.
Then I discovered that there are cyclics that can be created using
