[lkml]   [2005]   [Oct]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] ktimers subsystem 2.6.14-rc2-kt5

On Mon, 17 Oct 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> why you insist on ktimers being 'process timers'?

Because they are optimized for process usage. OTOH kernel usage is more
than just "timeouts".

> so to answer your question: it is totally possible for a watchdog
> mechanism to use ktimers. In fact it would be desirable from a
> robustness POV too:

"possible" and "desirable" is still different from "preferable", as they
involve a higher cost.

> e.g. we dont want a watchdog from being
> overload-able via too many timeouts in the timer wheel ...

Please explain.

bye, Roman
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: 2005-10-17 22:34    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean