lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] sky2: Use deferrable timer for watchdog
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:13:28 -0500 (EST)
Parag Warudkar <parag.warudkar@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> sky2 can use deferrable timer for watchdog - reduces wakeups from idle per
> second.
>
> Signed-off-by: Parag Warudkar <parag.warudkar@gmail.com>
>
> --- linux-2.6/drivers/net/sky2.c 2007-12-07 10:04:39.000000000 -0500
> +++ linux-2.6-work/drivers/net/sky2.c 2007-12-18 20:07:58.000000000 -0500
> @@ -4230,7 +4230,10 @@
> sky2_show_addr(dev1);
> }
>
> - setup_timer(&hw->watchdog_timer, sky2_watchdog, (unsigned long) hw);
> + hw->watchdog_timer.function = sky2_watchdog;
> + hw->watchdog_timer.data = (unsigned long) hw;
> + init_timer_deferrable(&hw->watchdog_timer);
> +
> INIT_WORK(&hw->restart_work, sky2_restart);
>
> pci_set_drvdata(pdev, hw);

Does it really reduce the wakeup's or only change who gets charged by powertop?
The system is going to wakeup once a second anyway. Looks to me that if the
timer is using round_jiffies(), that setting deferrable just changes the accounting.

My interpretation of the api is:
* round_jiffies() - timer wants to wakeup but isn't precise about when so schedule
on next second when system will wake up anyway;
e.g why meetings are usually scheduled on the hour

* deferrable - timer doesn't have to really wakeup but wants to happen near
a particular time. e.g. "I'll meet you at the pub around 8pm"

Therefore doing deferrable is unnecessary for timers using round_jiffies unless system
is so good at doing timers that it is going to skip doing timer once per second.

--
Stephen Hemminger <stephen.hemminger@vyatta.com>


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2007-12-20 18:19    [W:0.064 / U:0.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site