Messages in this thread | | | From | Mark Salisbury <> | Subject | Re: No 100 HZ timer ! | Date | Tue, 10 Apr 2001 08:07:04 -0400 |
| |
which kind of U/K accaounting are you referring to?
are you referring to global changes in world time? are you referring to time used by a process?
I think the reduction of clock interrupts by a factor of 10 would buy us some performance margin that could be traded for a slightly more complex handler.
On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Andi Kleen wrote: > On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 02:19:28PM -0400, Mark Salisbury wrote: > > this is one of linux biggest weaknesses. the fixed interval timer is a > > throwback. it should be replaced with a variable interval timer with interrupts > > on demand for any system with a cpu sane/modern enough to have an on-chip > > interrupting decrementer. (i.e just about any modern chip) > > Just how would you do kernel/user CPU time accounting then ? It's currently done > on every timer tick, and doing it less often would make it useless. > > > -Andi > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ -- /*------------------------------------------------** ** Mark Salisbury | Mercury Computer Systems ** ** mbs@mc.com | System OS - Kernel Team ** **------------------------------------------------** ** I will be riding in the Multiple Sclerosis ** ** Great Mass Getaway, a 150 mile bike ride from ** ** Boston to Provincetown. Last year I raised ** ** over $1200. This year I would like to beat ** ** that. If you would like to contribute, ** ** please contact me. ** **------------------------------------------------*/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |