[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] ktimers subsystem 2.6.14-rc2-kt5

    On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote:

    > why you insist on ktimers being 'process timers'?

    Because they are optimized for process usage. OTOH kernel usage is more
    than just "timeouts".

    > so to answer your question: it is totally possible for a watchdog
    > mechanism to use ktimers. In fact it would be desirable from a
    > robustness POV too:

    "possible" and "desirable" is still different from "preferable", as they
    involve a higher cost.

    > e.g. we dont want a watchdog from being
    > overload-able via too many timeouts in the timer wheel ...

    Please explain.

    bye, Roman
    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: 2005-10-17 22:34    [W:0.018 / U:78.344 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site