[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [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 -
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
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: 2005-09-05 09:40    [W:0.331 / U:32.632 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site