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:0.121 / U:0.804 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site