lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] i386: Selectable Frequency of the Timer Interrupt.
From
Date
On Mon, 2005-05-16 at 17:55 -0700, christoph wrote:
>
> Runtime? That seems to be a bad idea. It would be better to rewrite
> the timer subsystem to be able to work tickless.
>

I agree 100%, I think it's especially crazy to allow selecting 100, 250,
500, etc, whether at runtime or compile time. Might as well just go
tickless.

How do you expect application developers to handle not being able to
count on the resolution of nanosleep()? Currently they can at least
assume 10ms on 2.4, 1ms on 2.6. Seems to me that if you are no longer
guaranteed to be able to sleep 5ms on 2.6, you would just have to
busywait. Is it me, or does that way lie madness?

Lee

-
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: 2005-05-18 01:32    [W:0.055 / U:0.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site