Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 5 Sep 2005 08:37:28 +0100 | From | Russell King <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/3] dynticks - implement no idle hz for x86 |
| |
On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 11:02:25AM +0530, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote: > I don't see provisions for all these in the current ARM implementation.
That's because, like x86, we've been ignoring each other. ARM doesn't handle dyntick SMP yet - ARM is fairly young as far as SMP issues goes, and as yet doesn't include a full SMP implementation in mainline.
Despite that, the timers as implemented on the hardware are not suitable for dyntick use - attempting to use them, you lose long term precision of the timer interrupts.
> 5. Don't see how DYN_TICK_SKIPPING is being used. In SMP scenario, > it doesnt make sense since it will have to be per-cpu. The bitmap > that I talked of exactly tells that (whether a CPU is skipping > ticks or not).
What's DYN_TICK_SKIPPING and what's it used for? It looks like a redundant definition left over from Tony's original implementation.
-- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core - 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/
| |