Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 31 Jul 2013 19:13:02 -0500 | From | Timur Tabi <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] Convert PowerPC macro spin_event_timeout() to architecture independent macro |
| |
On 07/31/2013 07:04 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > If it yields why are we using udelay? Why not usleep_range()? It would > be useful to have a variant that worked in interrupt context and it > looked like that was almost possible.
I've never heard of usleep_range() before, so I don't know if it applies. Apparently, udelay() includes its own call to cpu_relax(). Is it possible that cpu_relax() is a "lightweight" yield, compared to sleeping?
FYI, you might want to look at the code reviews for spin_event_timeout() on the linuxppc-dev mailing list, back in March 2009.
-- -- Timur Tabi
| |