Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 15 Feb 2012 20:43:38 +0000 | From | Matthew Garrett <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] hrtimers: Special-case zero length sleeps |
| |
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 09:40:28PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, 2012-02-15 at 20:38 +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > Application authors do seem to have ended up under the belief > > that sleep(0) is a meaningful thing to do, and the internet seems to be > > full of suggestions to use it rather than sched_yield(). > > http://xkcd.com/386/
I'm not even going to pretend to disagree. The question is whether we want to support their breakage anyway. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org
| |