Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261846AbVC3LuN (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Mar 2005 06:50:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261823AbVC3LuN (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Mar 2005 06:50:13 -0500 Received: from linux01.gwdg.de ([134.76.13.21]:31649 "EHLO linux01.gwdg.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261847AbVC3LuG (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Mar 2005 06:50:06 -0500 Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 13:50:01 +0200 (MEST) From: Jan Engelhardt To: Davide Rossetti cc: "Bouchard, Sebastien" , "'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'" Subject: Re: Delay in a tasklet. In-Reply-To: <424A7C58.7040105@roma1.infn.it> Message-ID: References: <5009AD9521A8D41198EE00805F85F18F054EA085@sembo111.teknor.com> <424A7C58.7040105@roma1.infn.it> 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: 614 Lines: 18 > I'd be interested in the answer as well. I have a driver which does > udelay(100), so no 1000 but anyway, and of course I end up having the X86_64 > kernel happily crying. I'm moving to a little state-machine to allow for a > multi-pass approach instead of busy-polling.. > regards schedule_timeout() would come to mind. Jan Engelhardt -- No TOFU for me, please. - 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/