On Sat, Jul 29, 2006 at 12:48:51PM +0300, Shem Multinymous wrote:
> I don't think "update frequency" is a good abstraction. The hardware's
> update may not be variable and irrregular (e.g., event-based), and
> there's there's an issue of phase sync to avoid unnecessary latency.
>
> The lazy polling approach I described in my last post to Vojtech
> ("block until there's a new readout or N milliseconds have passed,
> whichever is later") looks like a more general, accurate and efficient
> interface.
If "N" is given by the kernel, then it's identical to an event-based
approach. ;) Just described in different words.
--
Vojtech Pavlik
Director SuSE Labs
-
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/
[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]
