Re: select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,&t1) used for delay

Alex Riesen wrote:

Why don't you just use nanosleep(2) (or usleep)?

I can think of one main reason...existing code. Also, nanosleep()rounds up excessively in many kernel versions, so that a request tosleep for less than 1 tick ends up sleeping for 2 ticks.


The select() man page explicitly mentions this usage;

"Some code calls select with all three sets empty, n zero, and anon-null timeout as a fairly portable way to sleep with subsecondprecision."


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: select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,&t1) used for delay
  - From: Bob Copeland <[email protected]>
- Re: select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,&t1) used for delay
  - From: Bernd Petrovitsch <[email protected]>

References:
- select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,&t1) used for delay
  - From: "Madhu K.S." <[email protected]>
- Re: select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,&t1) used for delay
  - From: Alex Riesen <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.14-rc3-rt2
Next by Date: Re: SMP syncronization on AMD processors (broken?)
Previous by thread: Re: select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,&t1) used for delay
Next by thread: Re: select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,&t1) used for delay
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]