Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Subject | Re: msleep_interruptible vs msleep | Date | Mon, 4 Sep 2006 21:38:26 +0200 |
| |
Am Monday 04 September 2006 21:29 schrieb matthieu castet: > > But why if I have a kernel thread that do [1] : > > while (true) { > Do some stuff > msleep(1000) > } > > the load average is high (near 100%). > > and if I use msleep_interruptible the load average is normal.
These are the traditional semantics of incorruptible vs. noninterruptible sleep. A process that sleep noninterruptible contributes to the load average but does not consume actual CPU cycles.
I guess you can take that as a hint that the code you're describing above is a bad thing to do.
> Does the same applies to wait_event_timeout vs > wait_event_interruptible_timeout ?
yes.
Arnd <>< - 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/
| |