Linux - KernelThis forum is for all discussion relating to the Linux kernel.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I was reading a bit about kernel hacking and module programming. I read an o'reilly book about it, etc...
I was wondering if I understand this right. Is it true I can't sleep for some time that's smaller than one jiffy, 4ms? I know there's udelay and mdelay, but busy waiting isn't really an option for me.
Well,
at the moment out of curiosity, because it's interesting. I'm just trying to understand linux a bit better.
Originally I was researching some ways to send DMX with an embedded linux device, open source, not for profit. But I think I'll do this with it's uart, which fortunately can be clocked at exactly 250kbit. But there's still one moment where I need to send a 88us break.
That's what you should use: a UART; a hardware-device that can be programmed to issue an external signal or an interrupt after a precisely controllable interval.
Linux can field at-least a "bottom half" response to a hardware interrupt "speedily," but it does not guarantee the interrupt-latency nor does it guarantee the additional latency inherent in scheduling the "upper half" (by any other name). This is not within the design scope of this operating-system.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.