![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Russell King wrote: > On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 10:33:41PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote: > >>No, sched_clock is fine to be used in CPU scheduling choices, which are >>heuristic anyway (although strictly speaking, even using it for timeslicing >>within a single CPU could cause slight unfairness). > > > Except maybe if it rolls over every 178 seconds, which is my original > point. Maybe someone could comment on my initial patch sent 5 days > ago? Well yes that's true. I meant the "sched_clock interface as defined". Now there are obviously issues (including the one you raised) that makes the sched_clock interface unreasonable to implement. I stand by my first reply to your comment WRT the API. Seems like most of the rest of the debate was unrelated or concerning implementation details. kernel/sched.c patches implementing the new API would get an ack from me. -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com - 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/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2006-05-07 12:59 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||