Michael Reinelt wrote:
>
> george anzinger wrote:
> >
> > Michael Reinelt wrote:
> > >
> > > At the moment I implemented by own delay loop using a small assembler
> > > loop similar to the one used in the kernel. This has two disadvantages:
> > > assembler isn't that portable, and the loop has to be calibrated.
> >
> > Why not use C? As long as you calibrate it, it should do just fine.
> Because the compiler might optimize it away.
Not if you use volatile on the data type.
>
> > On
> > the other hand, since you are looping anyway, why not loop on a system
> > time of day call and have the loop exit when you have the required time
> > in hand. These calls have microsecond resolution.
> I'm afraid they don't (at least with kernel 2.0, I didn't try this with
> 2.4).
Gosh, I started with 2.2.14 and it does full microsecond resolution.
They have microsecond resolution, but increment only every 1/HZ.
>
> Someone gave me a hint to loop on rdtsc. I will look into this.
This ticks at 1/"cpu MHz", which can be found by: "cat /proc/cpuinfo"
>
> > > - why are small delays only possible up to 2 msec? what if I needed a
> > > delay of say 5msec? I can't get it?
> >
> > If you want other times, you can always make more than one call to
> > nanosleep.
> Good point!
~snip~
George
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 15 2001 - 21:00:11 EST