On 08/16/2017 03:14 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 15:07:25 -0400 > Waiman Long <longman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> I am thinking about maybe letting a RT task to sleep a tiny amount of >> time instead of calling schedule(). Hopefully, that will allow a >> lower-priority task to make forward progress. > That is actually one of the ugly hacks we have in the PREEMPT_RT patch > (and one of the things we need to fix before getting it to mainline). > > A simple msleep(1). > > -- Steve I am planning to use usleep_range(). That will allow a short sleep in the us range instead of ms. The documentation suggest that for a 10us-20ms sleep. Cheers, Longman
