[lkml]   [2001]   [Apr]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: No 100 HZ timer !
On Mon, 9 Apr 2001, Alan Cox wrote:

> > > Its worth doing even on the ancient x86 boards with the PIT.
> >
> > Note that programming the PIT is sloooooooow and doing it on every timer
> > add_timer/del_timer would be a pain.
> You only have to do it occasionally.
> When you add a timer newer than the current one
> (arguably newer by at least 1/2*HZ sec)

That's only if we want to do no better than the current system. We'd want
a new variable called timer_margin or something, which would be dependent
on interrupt source and processor, and could be tuned up or down via

> When you finish running the timers at an interval and the new interval is
> significantly larger than the current one.

Make that larger or smaller. If we come out of a quiescent state (1 hz
interrupts, say) and start getting 10ms timers, we want to respond to them
right away.

> Remember each tick we poke the PIT anyway

We could also have a HZ_max tunable above which we would not try to
reprogram the interval. On older systems, this could be set at

"Love the dolphins," she advised him. "Write by W.A.S.T.E.."

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:25    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean