[lkml]   [2005]   [Aug]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] i386 No-Idle-Hz aka Dynamic-Ticks 3
* George Anzinger <> [050809 13:07]:
> >>I can take a shot at addressing these concerns in dynamic_tick patch, but
> >>it seems to me that VST has already addressed all these to a big extent.
> >>Had you considered VST before? The biggest bottleneck I see in VST going
> >>mainline is its dependency on HRT patch but IMO it should be possible to
> >>write a small patch
> >>to support VST w/o HRT.
> >>
> >>George, what do you think?
> >
> >
> >HRT + VST depend on APIC only, and does not use next_timer_interrupt().
> I convinced my self that the next_timer... code in timer.c misses timers
> (i.e. gives the wrong answer). I did this (after wondering due to
> performance) by scanning the whole timer list after I had the
> next_timer... answer and finding a better answer, not always, but some
> times. That code does not address the cascade list correctly.

Do you have a patch around for improving next_timer_interrupt()?

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: 2005-08-10 10:05    [W:0.139 / U:13.052 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site