lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] new timeofday core subsystem (v.A0)
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 01:04:04AM -0700, George Anzinger wrote:
> >One could do this but we want to have a tickless system. The tick is only
> >necessary if the time needs to be adjusted.
>
> I really think a tickless system, for other than UML systems, is a loosing
> thing. The accounting overhead on context switch (which increases as the
> number of switchs per second) will cause more overhead than a periodic
> accounting tick once a respectable load appears.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

On a largely idle system (like notebooks on battery power in typical use)
the accounting overhead will be less a problem. However, the CPU being
woken up each millisecond will cause an increased battery usage. So if
the load is less than a certain threshold, tickless systems do make much
sense.

Dominik
-
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: 2005-03-22 14:06    [W:0.243 / U:0.064 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site