Alan Cox wrote:
> On Wed, 2002-08-14 at 21:58, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>
>>Since some processors now have "busy wait delay" instructions, this
>>would also make it possible to do:
>
>
> Nobody should be using an empty busy loop. If its a short timed busy
> loop then they should be using udelay, if its a long one
> schedule_timeout()
>
Indeed.
> If its polling hardware then it isnt an empty loop
True indeed as well, although we should still have a busy_wait(); macro
that can insert whatever hint instruction the architecture might or
might not have.
-hpa
-
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 Aug 15 2002 - 22:00:38 EST