Message-ID: <20051121071213.1135.qmail@dag.newtech.fi>
To: Frank Sorenson <frank@tuxrocks.com>
cc: Dag Nygren <dag@newtech.fi>, Nish Aravamudan <nish.aravamudan@gmail.com>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dag@newtech.fi
Subject: Re: nanosleep with small value 
In-Reply-To: Message from Frank Sorenson <frank@tuxrocks.com> 
   of "Thu, 17 Nov 2005 12:47:09 MST." <437CDE3D.90606@tuxrocks.com> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2005 09:12:13 +0200
From: Dag Nygren <dag@newtech.fi>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 749
Lines: 24


> Dag Nygren wrote:
> > But what is the point of having a nanosleep() in that case when you could do
> > just fine with usleep() ?
> 
> I'd suggest looking into the kthrt patches (which incorporates ktimers
> and John Stultz's timeofday patches):  http://www.tglx.de/projects/ktimers/

Thanks for that tip. This completely solved my problem; The program works 
again.

There seems to be two "competing" patches out there, but this seems to be the 
way
to go as the kernel bunch is behind it.

Best

Dag

-
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/