Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 19 May 2005 10:02:45 -0700 | From | George Anzinger <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] A more general timeout specification |
| |
Andi Kleen wrote: ~> > > If you do a new structure for this I would suggest adding a > "precision" field (or the same with a different name). Basically > precision would tell the kernel that the wakeup can be in a time > range, not necessarily on the exact time specified. This helps > optimizing the idle loop because you can batch timers better and is > important for power management and virtualized environments. The > kernel internally does not use support this yet, but there are plans > to change the internal timers in this direction and if you're defining > a new user interface I would add support for this. > > I am not sure precision would be the right name, other suggestions > are welcome. >
I think the accepted and standard way to do this is to use different "clock"s. For example, in the HRT patch the clocks CLOCK_REALTIME_HR and CLOCK_MONOTONIC_HR are defined as high resolution clocks. > ~ -- George Anzinger george@mvista.com High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/ - 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/
| |