lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Dec]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] HZ free ntp

* john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 2006-12-06 at 15:33 +0100, Roman Zippel wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > i disagree with you and it's pretty low-impact anyway. There's still
> > > quite many HZ/tick assumptions all around the time code (NTP being one
> > > example), we'll deal with those via other patches.
> >
> > Why do you pick on the NTP code? That's actually one of the places where
> > assumptions about HZ are largely gone. NTP state is updated incrementally
> > and this won't change, but the update frequency can now be easily
> > disconnected from HZ.
>
> Hey Roman,
> Here's my rough first attempt at doing so. I'd not call it easy, but
> maybe you have some suggestions for a simpler way?
>
> Basically INTERVAL_LENGTH_NSEC defines the NTP interval length that
> the time code will use to accumulate with. In this patch I've pushed
> it out to a full second, but it could be set via config
> (NSEC_PER_SEC/HZ for regular systems, something larger for systems
> using dynticks).

cool! I'll give this one a go in -rt, combined with the exponential
second-overflow patch. (that one is now algorithmically safe, right?)

Ingo
-
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: 2006-12-13 10:57    [W:0.188 / U:0.532 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site