Re: nanosleep question

[Michael Reinelt <reinelt@eunet.at>]

george anzinger wrote:
> > > > At the moment I implemented by own delay loop using a small assembler
> > > > loop similar to the one used in the kernel. This has two disadvantages:
> > > > assembler isn't that portable, and the loop has to be calibrated.
> > >
> > > Why not use C?  As long as you calibrate it, it should do just fine.
> > Because the compiler might optimize it away.
> 
> Not if you use volatile on the data type.
I did a lost of testing and experimenting, and found the assembler loop
the best solution (it has the finest granualrity even on slower
systems).

> > > the other hand, since you are looping anyway, why not loop on a system
> > > time of day call and have the loop exit when you have the required time
> > > in hand.  These calls have microsecond resolution.
> > I'm afraid they don't (at least with kernel 2.0, I didn't try this with
> > 2.4).
> 
> Gosh, I started with 2.2.14 and it does full microsecond resolution.

Oh! Shame on me! I must have missed something here!

I could swear that this didn't work for me. I tried it yesterday, you
are right, there is microsecond resolution. Even on an old 2.0.38
kernel...

This solves all my problems. I'll loop on gettimeofday().

Thanks a lot!

                 Michael

-- 
netWorks       	                                  Vox: +43 316  692396
Michael Reinelt                                   Fax: +43 316  692343
Geisslergasse 4					  GSM: +43 676 3079941
A-8045 Graz, Austria			      e-mail: reinelt@eunet.at