Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268270AbUJVWyr (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:54:47 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268265AbUJVWyS (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:54:18 -0400 Received: from fw.osdl.org ([65.172.181.6]:32900 "EHLO mail.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268283AbUJVWxk (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Oct 2004 18:53:40 -0400 Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2004 15:53:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , Paul Mackerras Subject: Re: [PATCH] pmac_cpufreq msleep cleanup/fixes In-Reply-To: <1098484616.6028.80.camel@gaston> Message-ID: References: <200410221906.i9MJ63Ai022889@hera.kernel.org> <1098484616.6028.80.camel@gaston> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 832 Lines: 23 On Sat, 23 Oct 2004, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > > Please revert that change until we have made absolutely sure that msleep(1) > on a HZ=1000 machine will actually sleep at least 1ms, this is really not > clear since it will end up doing schedule_timeout(1) which, afaik, will > only guarantee to sleep up to the next jiffie, which can be a lot shorter > than the actual duration of a jiffie. In that case I'd much prefer to revert the whole previous "cleanup" as well, since it obviously isn't really. Having msleep(1 + jiffy_to_ms(1)); is just not a cleanup to me. Linus - 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/