[lkml]   [2005]   [Aug]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] i386 No-Idle-Hz aka Dynamic-Ticks 3
    * George Anzinger <> [050809 13:07]:
    > >>I can take a shot at addressing these concerns in dynamic_tick patch, but
    > >>it seems to me that VST has already addressed all these to a big extent.
    > >>Had you considered VST before? The biggest bottleneck I see in VST going
    > >>mainline is its dependency on HRT patch but IMO it should be possible to
    > >>write a small patch
    > >>to support VST w/o HRT.
    > >>
    > >>George, what do you think?
    > >
    > >
    > >HRT + VST depend on APIC only, and does not use next_timer_interrupt().
    > I convinced my self that the next_timer... code in timer.c misses timers
    > (i.e. gives the wrong answer). I did this (after wondering due to
    > performance) by scanning the whole timer list after I had the
    > next_timer... answer and finding a better answer, not always, but some
    > times. That code does not address the cascade list correctly.

    Do you have a patch around for improving next_timer_interrupt()?

    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: 2005-08-10 10:05    [W:0.021 / U:28.860 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site