On Wed 2017-01-11 08:50:07, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:25:29PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > > > "to have zero jitter" at least. I believe it is "does not".
> > > >
> > > > I don't see how atomic vs. non-atomic context makes difference. There
> > > > are so
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 10:25:29PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > "to have zero jitter" at least. I believe it is "does not".
> > >
> > > I don't see how atomic vs. non-atomic context makes difference. There
> > > are sources of jitter that affect atomic context...
> >
> > The relevanc
Hi!
> > "to have zero jitter" at least. I believe it is "does not".
> >
> > I don't see how atomic vs. non-atomic context makes difference. There
> > are sources of jitter that affect atomic context...
>
> The relevance is that while there is jitter in atomic context it can
> be quite small (dep
On Tue, Dec 27, 2016 at 10:56:26PM +0100, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Tue 2016-12-13 04:58:43, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > useleep_range() with a delta of 0 makes no sense and only prevents the
> > timer subsystem from optimizing interrupts. As any user of usleep_range()
> > is in non-atomic context
On Tue 2016-12-13 04:58:43, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> useleep_range() with a delta of 0 makes no sense and only prevents the
> timer subsystem from optimizing interrupts. As any user of usleep_range()
> is in non-atomic context the timer jitter is in the range of 10s of
> microseconds anyway.
>
On Wed, 2016-12-14 at 00:37 +, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 04:27:32PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> > a, On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 09:19 +, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:10:50AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > > On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc G
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 04:27:32PM -0800, Joe Perches wrote:
> a, On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 09:19 +, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:10:50AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > > > useleep_range() with a delta of 0 makes no sens
a, On Tue, 2016-12-13 at 09:19 +, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:10:50AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > > useleep_range() with a delta of 0 makes no sense and only prevents the
> > > timer subsystem from optimizing interru
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 01:05:12PM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:10:50AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > > On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > > > useleep_range() with a delta of 0 makes no sense and o
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:10:50AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > > useleep_range() with a delta of 0 makes no sense and only prevents the
> > > timer subsystem from optimizing interrupts. As any us
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> I fully agree - without automation it is almost usless
> the coccinelle spatch is a seperate patch and it is tested butnot yet
> submitted.
Good, good! Sorry for the noise.
BR,
Jani.
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsu
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 11:10:50AM +0200, Jani Nikula wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> > useleep_range() with a delta of 0 makes no sense and only prevents the
> > timer subsystem from optimizing interrupts. As any user of usleep_range()
> > is in non-atomic context the tim
On Tue, 13 Dec 2016, Nicholas Mc Guire wrote:
> useleep_range() with a delta of 0 makes no sense and only prevents the
> timer subsystem from optimizing interrupts. As any user of usleep_range()
> is in non-atomic context the timer jitter is in the range of 10s of
> microseconds anyway.
>
> This
useleep_range() with a delta of 0 makes no sense and only prevents the
timer subsystem from optimizing interrupts. As any user of usleep_range()
is in non-atomic context the timer jitter is in the range of 10s of
microseconds anyway.
This adds a note making it clear that a range of 0 is a bad ide
14 matches
Mail list logo