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:0.021 / U:121.804 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site