On 07/31/2013 07:16 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > cpu_relax() is usually just a compiler barrier or an instruction hint to > the cpu that it should cool down because we're spinning in a tight loop. > It certainly shouldn't be calling into the scheduler. Ah yes, I remember now. So it does seem that if we can fix the problem of non-incrementing 'jiffies', then this macro can be used in interrupts. Of course, that assumes that spinning in interrupt context is a good idea to begin with. Maybe we shouldn't be encouraging it? >> > FYI, you might want to look at the code reviews for spin_event_timeout() >> > on the linuxppc-dev mailing list, back in March 2009. >> > > Sure. Any pointers? Otherwise I'll go digging around the archives. https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2009-March/thread.html -- Timur Tabi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe sparclinux" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
