Re: better msleep for drivers

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>]

Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
> 
>>> Still longer term I suppose there's really no way around having accurate
>>> sleep functions and it's probably better to start testing earlier than later.
>> No objections, but we should not do that with a stupid msleep
>> replacement interface; instead we should expose a flexible in kernel
>> variant of hrtimer_nanosleep() which lets the user utilize
>> ABS/REL_TIME and the different clocks. A msleep helper can be built on
>> top of this very easily.
> 
> While you are at it... it would be cool to have
> 
> 'mdelay(2500 msec), but it is okay to wait 100msec more' -- type
> interface, so we could use that for nohz benefit.
> 
> Currently, mdelay is 'it is okay to wait 10msec more' interface, and
> it would be nice to have that explicit.

eh, I think you transposed mdelay with msleep?

msleep() is the "it is okay to wait longer than I said" interface, not 
mdelay().  mdelay() has always been non-sleeping and exact (as much as 
the delay loop allows)

	Jeff