[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:0.020 / U:30.128 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site