> Really? > > udelay() seems to use > ... cpu_data(raw_smp_processor_id()).loops_per_jiffy ..
Ok that should be a good safety > > ..so it seems that bug trap is already there... because > raw_smp_processor_id() will probably just oops... And I double checked my docs - they say 8 cycles - 1uS Incidentally some of the drivers seem buggy for SMP. The bus locking nature of the inb_p probably hid this but they don't all seem to have sufficient locking to ensure that we don't get back to back cycles without delays Alan -- 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/
