lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Nov]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Fire Engine??
    On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 15:13:52 -0800
    "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote:

    > On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 23:56:41 +0100
    > Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote:
    >
    > > On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 14:36:20 -0800
    > > "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > > I don't think this is acceptable. It's important that all
    > > > of the timestamps are as accurate as they were before.
    > >
    > > I disagree on that. The window is small and slowing down 99.99999% of all
    > > users who never care about this for this extremely obscure
    > > misdesigned API does not make much sense to me.
    >
    > We can't change behavior like this. Every time we've tried to
    > do it, we've been burnt. Remember nonlocal-bind?

    The behaviour is not really changed, just the precision of the timestamp
    is temporarily (a few tens of ms on a busy network) worse.

    And the jitter in this timestamp is already higher than this when
    you consider queueing delays and interrupt mitigation in the driver.

    -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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:58    [W:0.058 / U:32.476 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site