Message-ID: <434AAD94.2060109@tmr.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:06:12 -0400
From: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.11) Gecko/20050729
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,&t1) used for delay
References: <1128606546.14385.26.camel@penguin.madhu> <81b0412b0510060727h35c0fd78i260037ca89f253f9@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <81b0412b0510060727h35c0fd78i260037ca89f253f9@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 947
Lines: 28

Alex Riesen wrote:
> On 10/6/05, Madhu K.S. <madhu.subbaiah@wipro.com> wrote:
> 
>>Hi all,
>>
>>In many application we use select() system call for delay.
>>
>>example:
>>select(0,NULL,NULL,NULL,&t1);
>>
>>select() for delay is very inefficient. I modified sys_select() code for
> 
> 
> Why don't you just use nanosleep(2) (or usleep)?

I think the answers here are (a) because there's an existing code base, 
and (b) as long as the functionality is required it might as well be 
provided optimally. If tou're going to do something at all, do it right.

-- 
    -bill davidsen (davidsen@tmr.com)
"The secret to procrastination is to put things off until the
  last possible moment - but no longer"  -me
-
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/