lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Sep]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Return value from schedule()
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 10:21:11 -0600
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 06:14:24PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > If schedule() returned whether or not it had scheduled another
> > > task, we could do something like:
> > >
> > > if (!schedule())
> > > udelay(10);
> >
> > hm, i'm not really sure - this really just seems to be a higher
> > prio variant of yield() combined with some weird code. Do we really
> > want to promote such arguably broken behavior? If there's any
> > chance of any polling to take a material amount of CPU time it
> > should be event driven to begin with.
>
> Oh, I'm not concerned about CPU utilisation, I'm concerned about PCI
> bus utilisation. Perhaps I'd like a yield_timeout() function instead
> where I say that I'd like to not run for at least 10 microseconds?
>
> Can we do that, or are we still jiffie-based there?
>

use schedule_hrtimerout() for this (hopefully will be in 2.6.28);
see this weeks LWN for an article describing it


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-09-04 19:33    [W:0.360 / U:0.716 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site