[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:0.022 / U:42.860 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site