Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760989AbXHITbk (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Aug 2007 15:31:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751145AbXHITbb (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Aug 2007 15:31:31 -0400 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.168]:62189 "EHLO ug-out-1314.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750741AbXHITba (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Aug 2007 15:31:30 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=APSJJVvJJVQHq8DmRv/4+qIwEHWe2fA3Wnurvxnsaz5m/SfVFF0e0wXygZ8hxrwc4hH/lum8mL40+E2rnEsAwUpzUEWB0ExoY7ZpnFSSX3DPQTXm5ItTql//WEf4ETvW9Ra4I0g2deB37aQ+gT7FTWMKVhwEoNCV00ByCm2lsYg= Message-ID: <1158166a0708091231r21903840mc927b6baa47e4598@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 20:31:28 +0100 From: "Denis Vlasenko" To: "Arjan van de Ven" Subject: Re: [PATCH] msleep() with hrtimers Cc: "Roman Zippel" , "Jonathan Corbet" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "Thomas Gleixner" , akpm@linux-foundation.org, "Ingo Molnar" In-Reply-To: <1186546512.2862.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <15327.1186166232@lwn.net> <1186255149.2777.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1186360983.2697.8.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1186378798.2697.10.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1186415621.2706.4.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1186546512.2862.3.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 807 Lines: 22 On 8/8/07, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > You keep claiming that hrtimers are so incredibly expensive; but for > msleep()... which is mostly called during driver init ... I really don't > buy that it's really expensive. We're not doing this a gazilion times > per second obviously... Yes. Optimizing delay or sleep functions for speed is a contradiction of terms. IIRC we still optimize udelay for speed, not code size... Read it again folks: We optimize udelay for speed How fast your udelay do you want to be today? Oh well. -- vda - 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/