[lkml]   [2004]   [Jul]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: preempt-timing-2.6.8-rc1
William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>>>AFAICT this is nothing more than rounding up.
> On Tue, Jul 13, 2004 at 10:57:54PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
>>But you want to round down by definition of preempt_thresh, don't you?
>>preempt_thresh = 1ms = 1000000us
>>ie. warn me if the lock hold goes _to or above_ 1000000us
> The semantics I implemented are warning for strictly above the
> preempt_thresh. Whether those semantics are ideal is irrelevant; it's
> faithful to those semantics.

You are right - I misread it, sorry.

> Given that people are asking for sub-
> millisecond latencies, maybe I should increase the precision.

Would soon be useful I think.
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 14:04    [W:0.287 / U:2.768 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site