Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: nanosleep | From | Robert Love <> | Date | 10 Apr 2002 01:57:16 -0400 |
| |
On Wed, 2002-04-10 at 00:41, mark manning wrote:
> thanx - how much of a difference should i expect - i know the syscall is > asking for at least the required ammount but that the task switcher might > not give me control back for a while after the requested delay but i was > expecting to be a little closer to what i had asked for - this isnt critical > of corse but i would like to know what to expect.
The minimum granularity of the timer is 1/HZ, which on a i386 is only 10ms.
If you want high-resolution timers, check out the high-res-timers project at http://high-res-timers.sf.net/ - they implement POSIX timers (which include a nanosleep call) with very high resolution (1/cpu clock).
Robert Love
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |