From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jul 2 05:57:22 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id FAA15914 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Thu, 2 Jul 1998 05:57:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from labinfo.iet.unipi.it (labinfo.iet.unipi.it [131.114.9.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id FAA15903; Thu, 2 Jul 1998 05:57:08 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it) Received: from localhost (luigi@localhost) by labinfo.iet.unipi.it (8.6.5/8.6.5) id NAA12406; Thu, 2 Jul 1998 13:27:00 +0200 From: Luigi Rizzo Message-Id: <199807021127.NAA12406@labinfo.iet.unipi.it> Subject: timeout granularity (was: Re: Console driver...) To: sos@FreeBSD.ORG Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 13:26:59 +0200 (MET DST) Cc: smoergrd@oslo.geco-prakla.slb.com, nick.hibma@jrc.it, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <199807021112.EAA00304@hub.freebsd.org> from "sos@FreeBSD.ORG" at Jul 2, 98 04:12:07 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG [about default timer granularity being too coarse for sampling the vertical retrace interval] the code might check if HZ is set to a suitable value (how large, e.g. 1000 or 2000, i have no idea) and use timeout instead of polling if the test is successful. Sooner or later hopefully we will move to large values of HZ anyways. (or, how about adding a utimeout() call to the kernel :) cheers luigi -----------------------------+-------------------------------------- Luigi Rizzo | Dip. di Ingegneria dell'Informazione email: luigi@iet.unipi.it | Universita' di Pisa tel: +39-50-568533 | via Diotisalvi 2, 56126 PISA (Italy) fax: +39-50-568522 | http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ _____________________________|______________________________________ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message