lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Possible spin-problem in nanosleep()
At 06:18 PM 6/26/2005 +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
>On Gwe, 2005-06-24 at 12:42, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> > Are you saying that each might get the CPU from between 0 and 1
> > tick, i.e., asynchronous with the tick? If so, depending upon the
> > phase between the timer-tick and when a task gets awakened, a task
> > may never get any CPU time at all. If so, this is a bug.
>
>No I'm saying the samping rate of the timer tick limits the resolution
>of accounting of data (ie straight information theory limits)

(precisely stated [again])

-
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: 2005-06-26 20:19    [W:0.035 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site