On 8/8/07, Andi Kleen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 03:09:14PM +0400, Manu Abraham wrote:
> > On 08 Aug 2007 13:55:28 +0200, Andi Kleen <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > Andrew Morton <[email protected]> writes:
> > > >
> > > > I'd be surprised if there was significant overhead - the maximum frequency
> > > > at which msleep() can be called is 1000Hz. We'd need an awful lot of
> > > > overhead for that to cause problems, surely?
> > >
> > > The bigger risk is probably to break drivers that rely on msleep(1)
> > > really being msleep( very long depending on HZ )
> > >
> > > But the only way to find out is to try it.
> >
> > Well, i am quite sure a lot of drivers will be broken. But well .. if
>
> If you know of specific examples you should list them so that
> they can be fixed proactively.
A bit hard to state, which all since quite some are RE'd. Well you can
hear the cries when it is broken. :)
Manu
-
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]
