[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1220025598.4417.63.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 08:59:58 -0700
From: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, tglx@...x.de,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] select: make select() use schedule_hrtimeout()
On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 08:08 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> rom: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 13:45:38 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH] select: make select() use schedule_hrtimeout()
>
> now that we have schedule_hrtimeout(), make select() use it.
> But only for short delays; really long delays are assumed to not
> need the highres level of accuracy but rather want the regular
> timer behavior for now.
>
> This is only done for delays shorter than 1 second; currently
> the assumption is that longer delays have no desire to get the
> higher accuracy.
Do you have any basis to make this "short delays" assumption? I would
think if regular timers can be used for longer than a second, people
will naturally assume anything else that's high res will also ..
The futex_wait() has code which looks a lot like your
schedule_hrtimeout() , (you might want to replace your code there
instead) , and it doesn't seem to have the short delays restriction ..
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists