Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 26 Jun 2005 20:14:10 +0200 | From | Mike Galbraith <> | Subject | Re: 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/
| |