Re: latency error (~2ms) with nanosleep

quade wrote:

Playing around with the (simple) measurement of latency-times
I noticed, that the systemcall "nanosleep" has always a minimal
latency from about ~2ms (haven't run it all night, so...). It
seems to be a systematical error.

Known issue. The x86 interrupt usually has a period of slightly less than a ms. It will therefore generally add nearly a whole ms to ensure that it does not ever wait for *less* than specified.

Chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: latency error (~2ms) with nanosleep
    • From: Nish Aravamudan <[email protected]>

• References:
  • latency error (~2ms) with nanosleep
    • From: quade <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: update sparse.txt to list actual location
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] Dynamic tick for x86 version 050609-2
• Previous by thread: Re: latency error (~2ms) with nanosleep
• Next by thread: Re: latency error (~2ms) with nanosleep
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]