[lkml]   [2001]   [Apr]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: No 100 HZ timer !
Alan Cox wrote:
> > Timers more precise than 100HZ aren't probably needed - as MIN_RTO is 0.2s
> > and MIN_DELACK is 0.04s, TCP would hardly benefit from them.
> There are a considerable number of people who really do need 1Khz resolution.
> Midi is one of the example cases. That doesn't mean we have to go to a 1KHz
> timer, we may want to combine a 100Hz timer with a smart switch to 1Khz

As somebody who is now debating how to measure latencies in a
giga-bit ethernet environment with several components doing
L3 switching in much less than 10 micro-seconds ... (hardware)
I agree that some method is need to achieve higher resolutions.
(Sigh... I will likely need to buy something big and expensive)
{this is for a system to make use of L. Yarrow's little protocol}
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: 2005-03-22 13:25    [W:0.122 / U:3.476 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site